Official Report 106KB pdf
Instrument Not Laid Before <br />the Parliament
Pollution Prevention and Control (Designation of Batteries Directive) (Scotland) Order 2008 (SSI 2008/86)
We have a choice here. First, are members content that the Scottish Government's interpretation as to the scope of the enabling power is reasonable?
We should ask the Scottish Government to provide an explanation. If our legal team have some doubts about the order, it is reasonable to explore the matter, as we do in general. Then we can be absolutely certain about the matter.
There has been a precedent for this, certainly during the previous session.
That is right. The previous committee questioned the use of the enabling power in this way.
Could you clarify what the result would be if we queried the order? Would that cause any gross impairment to the progress of the government of the country?
I would say not.
We have a convention. If we have doubts, we explore them, get answers and satisfy ourselves that the answers that we have received are reasonable. We should do that in these circumstances, although I would not go to the stake on the matter. I would be happy to go along with colleagues' views.
I do not mind doing that. Am I right in thinking that we are considering how the Government is interpreting the transposition of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council?
The Government is designating the directive for the purposes of the integrated pollution prevention and control regulations to enable it to make further transposing measures. Our view is that there are two alternative interpretations of the scope of the power. If members wish to seek clarification from the Government on its view, it is certainly open to them to do so.
I would not object to that.
Was the question that we want to ask previously asked of the same situation, and is it therefore expected that the answer will be the same as that which was previously given? We are talking about a typical process that we regularly go through, but we have not had an example of this since the current committee started to meet. Is that the position that we are in?
That is correct.
So this will be the first time this session that we will seek a reply to the question.
That is correct.
We can probably anticipate the answer that we will receive, but as we have not asked the question in this session, we probably should do so.
Members agree that we are not content. Therefore, we will ask the Scottish Government to provide an explanation of the point that is set out in the summary of recommendations.