Official Report 130KB pdf
Pig Carcase (Grading) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/565)
No points arise on SSI 2003/565.
Except the one about pigs being kept in proper-sized pens.
Race Relations Act 1976 (Statutory Duties) (Scotland) Amendment Order 2003<br />(SSI 2003/566)
There are two minor drafting points to raise on SSI 2003/566, which we could forward to the Executive. Do members agree to that?
Collagen and Gelatine<br />(Intra-Community Trade) (Scotland) (No 2) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/568)
No points arise on SSI 2003/568.
Honey (Scotland) Regulations 2003<br />(SSI 2003/569)
A point occurred to me as I looked through SSI 2003/569. It has probably arisen elsewhere, although I am not aware of any examples. Regulation 5(1) covers labelling requirements and subparagraph (c) requires that
Those are good points. I wonder about branding—if someone marks their honey as coming from Scotland, or from an area within Scotland, would they still have to put "UK" on it? It would be useful to ask about those points.
Regulation of Care<br />(Applications and Provision of Advice) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Order 2003 (SSI 2003/570)<br />Regulation of Care (Excepted Services) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/571)
Regulation of Care (Requirements as to Care Services) (Scotland) Amendment<br />(No 2) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/572)<br />Regulation of Care (Fees) (Scotland) Amendment Order 2003 (SSI 2003/573)
Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001 (Transitional Provisions) Order 2003<br />(SSI 2003/574)
There is a raft of instruments to do with regulation of care. No substantive points arise on SSI 2003/570, SSI 2003/571, SSI 2003/572 and SSI 2003/573. However, I gather that the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001 (Transitional Provisions) Order 2003 (SSI 2003/574) has now been revoked. I suggest that we do not consider the order. Is that the correct procedure, Gordon?
Absolutely.
Good.
Was the order revoked before we got it?
No—an instrument that revokes the order has just been laid. We could consider both at the same time.
We just heard about that instrument today.
The Executive knew that it could never get the order past Gordon Jackson.
Blast!
Registration of Establishments Keeping Laying Hens (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/576)
We come now to a rather difficult little regulation: the Registration of Establishments Keeping Laying Hens (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/576). It concerns registration and tracing where eggs have come from. The regulations are a total mess, according to our legal advice. They are not very coherent and the legal adviser is not even sure that all the mistakes have been picked up.
I recall using a particular textbook when I was training.
It was not training in keeping hens, was it?
No, it was not; it was catering training. The section on eggs was one of the biggest sections in the book. An egg has been broken for every dish for which an egg could possibly be broken in these regulations. They are a mess. The egg production industry in Scotland—as well as throughout the United Kingdom—has not had its troubles to seek. People who work in the industry deserve something that is clear and, if they have to get a registration number and register their establishments, they should be told how they can do that, what the regulations are, what the penalties are for infringements and how registration may be removed. Those seem to be four relatively simple things to tell the industry, and the regulations do not do that.
I was interested in the point about punishment for anyone who falls "fowl" of these incoherent regulations.
Oh!
That was a bad one.
The regulations state that someone who is guilty of an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine
Where is that?
It appears in regulation 12 on page 4.
We will wait while Gordon Jackson finds the place, because it will be interesting to get his view on the subject.
It is all right, Gordon—we are not in a hurry.
Many offences, such as speeding, are prosecuted only on summary complaint, but it is possible to prosecute anything on indictment if there are more serious charges on the same indictment. Are you with me?
Yes.
I suspect that regulation 12 is designed to cover the rare situation in which someone is prosecuted for really serious offences and an offence under the laying hens regulations is added in as part of the picture. The regulation is saying that, on the offence under the laying hens regulations, that person can still only be fined, even though they are being prosecuted on indictment on more serious matters. Is that wrong?
Alasdair Morgan does not look as if he is convinced.
I do not know—we should seek clarification.
If that point is not included in points (a) to (l) on the list from our legal adviser Margaret Macdonald, we will add it. [Interruption.] Apparently, it is included in the list.
We have pages of points on the regulations. Some aspects of the regulations seem to be bizarre. One of the points that was raised is that, if there are to be any changes in the information that is submitted as part of the application for registration, the person who submitted that application in the first place must submit those changes. No account is taken of the aging process, death, resignation, retirement or of any other factor that could mean that that person would not be available any more. That is a minor point, but it is indicative of the bad drafting of the whole instrument.
Could the death of the original person who was being sought generate a loophole that would mean that someone could get off?
I do not know.
I would like to see what a dead person would be charged with.
The regulations have obviously got us very confused, so I am sure that they will get other people very confused. As Christine May said, we want the regulations to be clear. We will ask the Executive for more information on points (a) to (l). We hope that it will have another crack at the regulations.
National Assistance<br />(Assessment of Resources) Amendment (No 4) (Scotland) Regulations 2003<br />(SSI 2003/577)
No points have been raised on SSI 2003/577.
I think that the regulations will be welcomed by a number of people. I have come across constituents who have been caught because they received awards that took their notional incomes over the threshold. The result was that they were obliged to pay, which meant that they got no benefit from the award. SSI 2003/577 will be warmly welcomed.
Food Labelling Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/578)
There are no points on SSI 2003/578.
Plant Protection Products (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/579)
There are no points on SSI 2003/579.
Local Government Pension Reserve Fund (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/580)
We move to consideration of SSI 2003/580. The only question of substance that has been raised is why it was thought necessary to include a definition of "local authority", given that the term is defined in the enabling powers in the same terms in which it is defined in the regulations. That is a fairly small point, but does the committee agree to raise it with the Executive?
Pupils' Educational Records (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/581)
We have a number of points on SSI 2003/581—they are listed (a) to (g) in the legal briefing—but they are of much smaller magnitude than those that we had on the Registration of Establishments Keeping Laying Hens (Scotland) Regulations 2003. Do members have any points that they would like to add to the fairly minor ones that are listed?
Paragraph 172 of the legal briefing states:
We will pass to the Executive points (a) to (g), which include Stewart Maxwell's point.