Justice and Home Affairs Committee, 07 Dec 1999

Meeting date: Tuesday, December 7, 1999

Official Report 112KB pdf

---

Petition (Tenancy of Shops)

We now move to item 1 on the agenda, petitions. We have two petitions before us today. Petition 4, from Maclay Murray & Spens, is on the tenancy of shops. Members will recall that we have considered this petition before and that I wrote to the Minister for Justice on 28 September. We received a reply towards the end of November, which has been circulated. In his letter, the minister stated that

"there were currently no plans to consider the question of commercial tenancies in Scotland or to bring forward legislation which could affect the situation outlined in the petition . . . However now that the issue has been brought to our attention we will consider it."

The committee now has to decide how it wants to deal with the petition. By virtue of the minister's letter, dated 24 November, the Executive has committed itself to considering the issue that the petition raises. That consideration, however long it takes, may go some way towards meeting the concerns expressed by Maclay Murray & Spens.

One of our difficulties—we keep coming back to this—is the pressure of time. We have already decided that matters that are not raised with us formally will be referred directly to our meeting immediately after the Easter recess, at which we will consider a large number of potential items of future business. The petition came to us formally, so it is in a slightly different position. However, given the commitment that the Executive has made, I am inclined to suggest that the committee's view should be to note the petition, but to suggest to the petitioners that they deal directly with the Executive on this matter. It is difficult to see how this committee could even begin to consider examining in more detail the bill that is proposed here until well after Easter. In those circumstances, the petitioners would be best advised to deal with the Executive directly, as we do not have the time to take this forward.

I know that the petitioners are here, although they are not before us in any formal capacity. Do committee members have any comments to make?

You have clearly outlined the committee's position, convener. We have an incredible number of matters to discuss, and we keep coming back to the issue of how much more we can take on. There is no way that the committee could discuss this proposed bill before Easter, and it might be difficult even after that, depending on what else we decide to do and bearing in mind what we were saying last week. For that reason, it might be best formally to say to the petitioners that they should follow the route that you have set out and talk to the Executive directly, given that it has stated that it had not previously considered this matter and might well now do so.

I think that the convener has made a good suggestion. Given the minister's response, perhaps we should also drop him a line welcoming his stand and asking him to keep us informed of progress.

It is not necessary for the petitioners to approach the Executive. The Public Petitions Committee could simply be informed that the Justice and Home Affairs Committee has progressed the matter to this point and recommended that it be taken up with the Executive. The Public Petitions Committee could then decide whether to accept that recommendation, without going back to the petitioners. That is the procedure for petitions.

Christine Grahame is suggesting that we intimate formally to the Public Petitions Committee what the position is with regard to the Executive's commitment.

Yes. We should forward the letter from the Executive and say that, in the circumstances, the petition should be forwarded directly to the Executive for its comments.

Would the Public Petitions Committee monitor the situation?

Yes, we would.

I know that you are on the Public Petitions Committee, which is helpful. So you would monitor how the Executive was taking this forward, having committed itself to considering it?

Yes. There are other members of the Public Petitions Committee present.

I accept what Christine has said about the Public Petitions Committee passing this back to the petitioners, but I still think that the Justice and Home Affairs Committee should make representations to the minister recording its thanks and interest.

Those could accompany the letter.

What is Phil suggesting that we make representations to the minister about?

I will write to the Minister for Justice on behalf of the committee, saying that we note what he said in his letter of 24 November—that he is committing the Executive to at least considering this issue. I will say that, as a consequence, we are referring the petition back to the Public Petitions Committee so that it can formally progress matters as it deems appropriate, that we will be writing to the petitioners advising them of what we are doing and that we would like the minister to keep us informed of any practical measures he intends to take in this area.

If, over a period of months, very little appears to be happening, the Public Petitions Committee could refer the matter back to us. However, given the Executive's commitment, for the committee at this stage to take on board work that it could not think of carrying out for a number of months would not be particularly useful. Are we all agreed on that course of action?

Members indicated agreement.