Official Report 339KB pdf
Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment Rules 2002 (SSI 2002/522)
Item 2 is consideration of two negative instruments. The first was issued to members some time ago and no comments have been received. The Subordinate Legislation Committee had nothing to report on the instrument. No motions to annul have been lodged and no other action can be taken on it. If members have no comments, I ask whether the committee agrees that it has no recommendation to make on the instrument.
Taxi Drivers' Licences (Carrying of Guide Dogs and Hearing Dogs) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2002<br />(SSI 2002/521)
The regulations were sent to members some time ago and no comments have been received. Members will remember that the regulations correct a technical inconsistency that appeared in the statutory instrument that the Local Government Committee considered on 10 December 2002. The Subordinate Legislation Committee drew the Parliament's attention to the fact that the Executive had not amended other aspects of the instrument that it had identified as being defectively drafted. No motions to annul have been lodged and no other action can therefore be taken on the instrument. However, as there are still faults with the instrument, members might wish to register their concerns about the defective drafting when we report back.
What is meant by the last paragraph in the letter to the Presiding Officer from the Scottish Executive? It says:
The clerk informs me that that relates to the 21-day rule.
What are the implications of not meeting the 21-day rule?
The Parliament has 21 days—from the date of the laying of the instrument to the date of its coming into force—in which to scrutinise the instrument. If the rule is broken, that will mean that there has been less parliamentary scrutiny. However, the rule can be broken in exceptional circumstances. As the regulations are an amending instrument, I imagine that that is why the rule was broken.
That does not sound particularly satisfactory. Perhaps we should bring that to the attention of the Subordinate Legislation Committee as well.
We should also say that the SSI has been before the Local Government Committee previously. The regulations were badly drafted. They have gone back and have been returned, but there are still parts that have not been sorted out.
Before we move on, convener, may I ask a question on behalf of my colleague Keith Harding?
Yes.
Mr Harding wonders whether there is any danger that the bills that are at stage 1 will in some way be delayed from moving to stage 2 as a result of the subject matter that the committee is considering today. He is specifically worried about his Dog Fouling (Scotland) Bill, which is going through stage 1 at the moment.
I do not think that there will be a problem. However, that is not a matter for the committee; it is a matter for the Parliamentary Bureau, because it sets the timetable. I am given to understand that the bills that are in process at the moment will be completed before 31 March.
So if Keith Harding has any doubts, he should approach the Parliamentary Bureau.
Yes.
Thank you.