Official Report 228KB pdf
International Criminal Court (Enforcement of Fines, Forfeiture and Reparation Orders) (Scotland) (Revocation) Regulations 2004 <br />(SSI 2004/437)
We have two other items, the first of which concerns subordinate legislation. I refer committee members to the note that the clerk has prepared setting out the background information on the International Criminal Court (Enforcement of Fines, Forfeiture and Reparation Orders) (Scotland) (Revocation) Regulations 2004, which is an instrument subject to the negative procedure. I point out that there is an error in the title and number that are given for the regulations in the committee paperwork.
It is appropriate to welcome the Executive's change of heart on the matter. It is an appropriate response, and I am sure that the Executive will get the regulations right the next time round.
I welcome the fact that the Executive is prepared to reconsider the regulations, but there has been a bit of dithering about the process and we are not addressing an issue that should now have been done and dusted. That is worth noting.
I am not sure what you mean by that. We asked the Executive to review its position because we were not happy to recommend to the Parliament that the original regulations be passed. The Executive has now done that. To revoke the original regulations, it must lodge a negative instrument, which is the regulations that we are considering today.
The matter has been around for quite some time. When we dealt with it in September, the issues were clear in what the Subordinate Legislation Committee said. Given the direction that the Justice 1 Committee gave, it should have been possible for the Executive to proceed with amended regulations or push on with the original ones.
I must speak in opposition to that, because the revocation regulations are what we asked for and what we have. If you are saying that you would like to know what the Executive intends to do next, I am happy to acknowledge the point. This will not be the end of the matter, because we must be clear about who will take responsibility for fines and forfeitures. I am pleased that the committee took a strong line on the original regulations and that the Executive has decided to take our view on it, because it avoids many difficult issues being raised in the Parliament. However, you are entitled to take a different view.
We should be cautious about urging speed on the Executive in this matter. Let it consider the matter carefully and introduce regulations that we can sensibly support, because we want to get them right. That is our role in having drawn the Executive's attention to what we considered to be the defects of the original regulations.
Notwithstanding Margaret Mitchell's comments, is the committee happy to note the International Criminal Court (Enforcement of Fines, Forfeiture and Reparation Orders) (Scotland) (Revocation) Regulations 2004?