The purpose of item 5 is for the committee to consider the delegated powers that are contained in the Land Registration etc (Scotland) Bill. In the context of that consideration, the committee is invited to agree what questions it wishes to raise with the Scottish Government. It is suggested that those questions are raised in written correspondence. On the basis of the responses that it receives, the committee will consider a draft report at its meeting on 24 January 2012.
It is further recommended that the committee may wish to ask the Scottish Government questions about the powers under sections 47(5) and 47(6). The delegated powers memorandum explains that use of the affirmative procedure is considered appropriate because the closure of the register of sasines to new deeds is likely to affect various stakeholders.
In relation to the power under section 55(4), the delegated powers memorandum explains that use of the affirmative procedure is considered appropriate because the power
The committee may wish to ask whether it could be explained why the powers in sections 58(6)(b) and 61(1) require to apply to any types of deed and cannot be more narrowly drawn; and, as it appears that the powers are capable of excluding such significant types, with a significant effect on part 4 of the bill, whether the Government could reconsider whether use of the affirmative procedure would be more suitable for scrutinising the exercise of the powers. Do members agree to those questions?
In relation to section 93(2), it appears that the power contained in proposed new section 9E(1)(b) of the Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995 could be used to prescribe significant matters—for example, requirements for the validity of electronic wills or electronic contracts for land transactions. The committee may wish to ask why it is considered that use of the negative procedure is the appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny of such regulations, rather than the initial requirements being prescribed in the bill or the affirmative procedure being applied. Do members agree to ask those questions?
Finally, given the significance of the power in section 103 in relation to information to be made available by the keeper and access to any of the keeper’s registers, the committee may wish to ask why the provision is framed as a general, discretionary power, instead of providing that an order shall make provision on matters as described by specified headings in connection with such information and access, and to ask why initial provision on those matters could not be made in the bill. Do members agree to ask those questions as well?
Does the committee agree to our raising those questions with the Government in writing?
If no one has any comments to make on the bill, that concludes item 5 and I move the meeting into private session.