Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 (Consequential Provisions) Order 2011 (SSI 2011/150)
Do we agree to report that the drafting of paragraph 3(4) of the schedule to the order appears to be defective because it refers to
We will also report, under the general ground, that there is a drafting error in paragraph 4(2)(a) of the schedule to the order, as it seeks to insert in regulation 2 of the Licensed Premises Gaming Machine Permits (Scotland) Regulations 2007 (SSI 2007/505) a new definition to follow after another definition, which does not exist in the regulations.
Food Labelling (Declaration of Allergens) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/152)
Do we agree to draw the regulations to the attention of the Parliament and the lead committee, under the general reporting ground, in that there has been a long delay—from 31 December 2010 to 18 March 2011—in correcting an incompatibility between Scots criminal law and European Union law?
Police Pensions (Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/154)
We can report, under the general ground, that there is a drafting error in new paragraph 9(ea)(1C) of schedule 2 to the Police Pensions (Scotland) Regulations 2007 (SSI 2007/201), as inserted by paragraph 15(3) of schedule 2 to the regulations. The Scottish Government has acknowledged the error. It is evident that “Regulations” requires to be read as the last word in that paragraph, to avoid absurdity. Is that agreed?
We must always avoid absurdity.
Civil Legal Aid (Scotland) (Fees) Amendment Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/160)
Do we agree to report the regulations on the basis that the meaning of regulation 4(c), which substitutes new regulation 3(4A) into the Civil Legal Aid (Scotland) (Fees) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989/1490), could be clearer about whether solicitors require to make an election between payment options where counsel has made a request under new regulation 3(3)(b)?
Quite right too.
National Health Service (Dental Charges) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/168)
We note that, prior to the regulations coming into force, there appears to have been no clear legal basis for dental bodies corporate to make and recover charges under the National Health Service (Dental Charges) (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/158) since 2 July 2010, from which date such bodies could be included on health board dental lists by virtue of the National Health Service (General Dental Services) (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/208). We will refer the matter to the lead committee. Is that agreed, and are we otherwise content with the regulations?
Animal By-Products (Enforcement) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/171)
Do we agree to report, under the general reporting ground, that, alas, the regulations contain drafting errors that are acknowledged by the Scottish Government? In regulation 15(2)(d), the reference to regulation “14(c)(iv)” should be to “14(c)(iii)” and, in regulation 15(2)(f), the references to regulation “14(b)(vi)” and “14(c)(iii)” should be to “14(b)(vii)” and “14(c)(iv)”.
I am sometimes thankful that I can read Roman numerals.
National Health Service Superannuation Scheme (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/173)
Do we agree to report that we are content with the reasons provided by the Scottish Government for the breach of the 21-day rule between the date of laying the regulations and the coming into force date, and are we otherwise content with the regulations?
We should also welcome the fact that the regulations promptly correct the errors that the committee identified in the National Health Service Superannuation Scheme (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (SSI 2011/117) when we considered them last week. That is pretty good work by the Government.
Licensing (Food Hygiene Requirements) (Scotland) (No 2) Order 2011 (SSI 2011/177)
I hope that we can welcome the Scottish ministers’ prompt making of the order to replace the Licensing (Food Hygiene Requirements) (Scotland) Order 2011 (SSI 2011/128) in light of the defects in that order that the committee highlighted at last week’s meeting.
Once again, we should be satisfied with the explanation provided for the failure to comply with our old friend, the 21-day rule. Is that agreed?
Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 (Consequential Provisions) Amendment Order 2011 (SSI 2011/187)
Are we content with the order, and with the explanation provided for the failure to comply with the 21-day rule?
It is worth making the general observation that a number of errors that were identified in the instruments have been rectified by the use of correction slips. That appears to be an increasing trend. Given the evidence that we recently received from the Minister for Parliamentary Business on that very issue, do we agree to flag up the issue as something for our successor committee to consider? In addition, it has been apparent that there is an on-going need for the consolidation of instruments and so, again, can we pass that on as part of our legacy to our successor committee? That would be a responsible thing to do.