Subordinate Legislation Committee, 13 Nov 2001

Meeting date: Tuesday, November 13, 2001

Official Report 81KB pdf

---

Delegated Powers Scrutiny

Good morning and welcome to the 31st meeting in 2001 of the Subordinate Legislation Committee.

---

Community Care and Health (Scotland) Bill

Item 1 concerns scrutiny of the delegated powers in the Community Care and Health (Scotland) Bill.

The committee raised several points with the Executive and we have received a letter from the Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care, Malcolm Chisholm, which states that the points raised were entirely relevant. He draws attention to the fact that there might have been a misunderstanding between the committee and the officials whom we questioned. We are grateful that the minister has written to us in such straightforward terms. Our thanks will be included in our report.

The minister has undertaken to lodge an appropriate amendment at stage 2.

I am pleased that the minister has generously acknowledged that mistakes were made. I hope that that will improve our relationship.

---

Water Industry (Scotland) Bill

We raised four points in relation to the delegated powers in the Water Industry (Scotland) Bill.

The committee might find that the Executive's response to those points is satisfactory in general. However, the main point that we raised was that we believed that a clearer explanation of the intention of the bill could be included in the bill. We might want to suggest to the Executive that that is not quite right yet.

We could leave that to the lead committee.

That would be appropriate. We should draw to that committee's attention our questions and comments and the response from the Executive. That would enable all of that to be included in the consideration of the bill.

Section 15(1) of the bill allows the Scottish ministers to specify by order the information that must be included in the register of enforcement notices. We felt that that power was a bit wide. The Executive's response is that it is considering lodging an amendment at stage 2. Do we agree that that should happen?

Members indicated agreement.

I am sure that the Executive will be pleased to hear that.

There is another strange bit in section 24(1). The Executive seems to be making work for itself. The committee thinks that it is appropriate that the power in section 24(1) should be exercisable by statutory instrument, but that there is no need for the bill to specify the particular procedure to which the instrument will be subject. As I said, perhaps this is one instrument too many; it is not required.

We could have a statutory instrument, but without the parliamentary procedure. The Executive has decided to do it in a different way. The committee thinks that it might be more elegant to do it the other way, but it is fine.

We have made our point about inelegance, but presumably we do not want to take it any further.

Members indicated agreement.

Under section 54(1), we asked for more information on the content of the proposed regulations on setting and collecting charges. Perhaps we could draw that to the attention of the lead committee.

Members indicated agreement.

---

Fur Farming (Prohibition) (Scotland) Bill

The convener has to confess to total ignorance about the measure. I have not got a clue what the Executive's response to our query is trying to get at. I would be delighted if anyone could enlighten me.

I realise that Westminster is dealing with fur farming regulations and it might well be that the Executive has decided to fall into line with that. However, there is a time difference between the English regulations coming into force and when the Scottish regulations would come into force. The Executive seems to have tried to regularise that. I do not understand why, because there are no fur farms in Scotland. If any of you are thinking of setting up a fur farm, do it now.

The legislation is possibly pre-emptive against the possibility that someone might decide to set up a fur farm.

Belt, braces and safety pins.

Someone could set one up and then claim compensation when it is shut down. Now there is a money-making idea.

I would expect that coming from you.

We are not meant to come up with ideas, money-making or otherwise.

So your reaction to this is "Whit fur"?

Does anyone want to press the point, or should we note the fact that this will happen?

We should just note the fact that this will happen.

I do not think we should get ourselves excited about it.