Subordinate Legislation Committee, 16 Jan 2007

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Official Report 127KB pdf

---

Legislative Consent Memorandum

---

Statistics and Registration Service Bill

We considered the legislative consent memorandum on the Statistics and Registration Service Bill last week, and we raised a question with the Executive regarding two clauses, where the same point was raised. The first of those is clause 45, in particular subsection (6)(b), which allows for provision

"authorising further disclosure by the Board of such information in circumstances where the disclosure would otherwise be prohibited by a rule of law, this Act or an Act passed before this Act."

We were concerned about the width of the powers in clause 49, "Power to authorise disclosure by the Board: Scotland", and we sought clarification of their intended use. The Executive has provided us with a general explanation of the policy intention behind clauses 45 and 49, which members have before them. I draw members' attention to paragraph 34 on page 7 of today's legal brief:

"We observe that the Executive has not directly answered the point that concerned the Committee namely that the powers in subsections (6)(b) of the 2 clauses to which reference is made could by virtue of the inclusion of a reference to the Bill be interpreted as allowing regulations under the power to override the safeguards written into the Bill and in particular the safeguards in clause 51."

In paragraph 35, the legal brief goes further:

"The reference in the relevant subsections to any other legislation is also of particular importance in Scotland given the restrictions in the Scotland Act."

Are you sufficiently reassured by what we have heard from the Executive?

The concern here, like similar concerns in the past, revolves around the use of the term, "consequential and supplementary provision". As you have reminded us, that phrase could be used to override the safeguards contained in the bill to protect people from the misuse of information. The Executive, rather than addressing that point, has simply given us further reassurance about the intent—although it is reassuring, I have to say. It is worth our noting that point, although there is nobody to whose attention we can draw the matter, perhaps other than the Parliament as a whole, as it is to do with a legislative consent memorandum.

The issue is on-going. This example is not the first of its kind, and I do not think that it will be the last. It is worth our noting the point for future reference but, on the basis that it all depends on the interpretation of "consequential and supplementary provision", I am reassured by the Executive's response.

Paragraph 33 of the legal brief lists a number of hurdles over which ministers would have to jump before any regulations came into force. I think that there are enough checks contained in the provisions to override any residual concerns.

You were not at the meeting last week, Stewart, but is there anything that you wish to add?

I agree with Euan Robson's comments about the safeguards. That is a fair point.

I suggest that we send the lead committee—the Finance Committee—all the relevant information that we got back from the Executive, including that which concerns the various safeguards that are in place, which Euan Robson mentioned. We might, however, add something about the wee bit of concern that we have about the provisions, as expressed in the paragraphs of the legal brief that I read out. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.