Official Report 276KB pdf
The purpose of agenda item 3 is for the committee to consider the delegated powers in the Assisted Suicide (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. The committee is invited to agree the questions that it wishes to raise with the member in charge, Patrick Harvie MSP, on the delegated powers in the bill. It is suggested that those questions are raised in written correspondence. The committee will have the opportunity to consider the responses at a future meeting before it agrees a draft report on the bill.
Section 23 provides that the Scottish ministers may issue directions about how licensed facilitators are to act, and licensing authorities are required to make their “best endeavours” to ensure that those directions are complied with by licensed facilitators. Licensing authorities must have regard to any guidance that is issued by the Scottish ministers, and any such directions or guidance must be published.
In relation to the powers to issue directions and guidance that are contained in section 23, does the committee agree to ask the member in charge for an explanation of how those powers may be used; what matters the directions and guidance could cover and why that would be more appropriate than those matters being contained in regulations made under section 22; and why it is appropriate that licensing authorities should be required to make their “best endeavours” to ensure that directions are complied with by licensed facilitators?
I am certainly content with the questions that it is proposed that we ask, but I suggest that we should ask a further couple of questions in relation to section 23, which is on directions and guidance for facilitators and licensing authorities.
There is no parliamentary procedure associated with the directions and guidance that section 23 provides for. I think that we should ask the proposer of the bill why that is the case, because if facilitators—who will be performing quite a novel role—must have regard to the directions that are issued, it would appear that there should be a process at least of laying them before Parliament and perhaps also of their gaining Parliament’s approval. We should ask the proposer of the bill why such a provision has not been considered and included in the bill.
Thank you. Do members have any other comments?
I support our asking the proposed questions. I am not enthusiastic about the bill as a whole and, in some ways, I find it strange that we are starting to get into the detail before we have debated the general principles of the bill.
Be that as it may, I am concerned about the fact that directions and guidance could mean quite a lot. In other controversial areas such as abortion, over the years the practice seems to have drifted away from what was originally intended, and I would want to be sure that a fairly firm line would be taken in directions and guidance in, for example, supervising the licensing authorities and the licensed facilitators over time.
I am also concerned about the use of the phrase “best endeavours” because, as far as I am aware, other legislation and regulations either have to be applied or do not have to be applied. It seems to me that the use of the phrase “best endeavours” would almost let anyone off with anything.
I think that our advice is that “best endeavours” is probably not a legal term, so we are with you on that.
Although I utterly oppose the bill in principle, I agree that, if it is to go beyond the stage that it is currently at, the regulations must be very tight and very accurate and that there should be no room for dubiety when it comes to interpretation. The use of the phrase “best endeavours” is simply not good enough. In addition, I have to say that I find the term “facilitators” almost Orwellian or Kafkaesque in concept—it is particularly unattractive.
Your comments are noted.
I take it that members approve of the three questions that I suggested that we ask. We will also ask Stewart Stevenson’s question.
I clarify that I was suggesting that we ask separately about directions for facilitators and guidance for licensing authorities.
So, in effect, you are suggesting that we ask two questions.
Correct.
Thank you for clarifying that.
Are members happy that we ask all those questions?
Members indicated agreement.
Super—thank you very much indeed.
Meeting closed at 11:38.