Subordinate Legislation Committee, 06 Oct 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, October 6, 2005

Official Report 100KB pdf

---

Instruments Not Laid Before the Parliament

---

Instruments Not Laid Before <br />the Parliament

---

Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 (Commencement No 4) Amendment (No 2) Order 2005 <br />(SSI 2005/459)<br />Pollution Prevention and Control (Designation of Public Participation Directive) (Scotland) Order 2005 <br />(SSI 2005/461)

The first instrument not laid before the Parliament is the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 (Commencement No 4) Amendment (No 2) Order 2005 (SSI 2005/459).

No particular points arise on that order, but an issue has come up that has been raised previously. It is to do with co-decisions of the European Council and European Parliament. It relates to whether—and I have underlined this in my briefing—[Interruption.] Yes, I am on SSI 2005/461. Is that okay? I know that I do veer off sometimes.

The issue is whether the enabling power can be used for co-decisions, or whether it should be used only in relation to the Council. We have written about the matter previously. We received an answer back, which, if I remember correctly, said that the enabling power was wide enough to allow for directives coming from co-decisions. It may well be that, if we write again, we will get a similar answer. I seek members' advice on the matter.

We might want to keep nagging away at the issue for as long as there is any doubt about the vires.

I agree with Murray Tosh. There is also an issue of consistency here. If we raise something once but do not raise it when it comes up again, that would seem rather inconsistent. I think that we should write to the Executive on the matter.

The clerk has very ably told me that I did in fact jump ahead, which I should not have done. We were meant to be considering SSI 2005/459. No points arise on that order. I did not say that I had moved on to SSI 2005/461. I am sorry about that.

But you did explain that you veer about. We know and accept that, convener.

Right—we are fully with it.

Is it agreed that we write a letter to the Executive, asking about that point again?

Members indicated agreement.

Just to go back, were there any points relating to SSI 2005/459? Members will have read the legal brief. The explanations that have been provided seem reasonable. There was a policy matter that was felt to be absent from the order, and there was a desire to go back on the issue. The commencement has been stopped for the moment.

There were unintended consequences from the interruption of the order.

Yes, that is right. The explanation seemed reasonable, and there was a letter on the matter.

I was quite happy to read the explanation.

Yes, it was very good.

The requirement for primary legislation was mentioned.

So we are okay with the order.

Members indicated agreement.

The committee's next meeting will be on Tuesday 25 October, when we will once again take evidence for phase 2 of our regulatory framework inquiry.

I thank the committee for meeting at this rather odd hour.

Meeting closed at 12:56.