Official Report 338KB pdf
Water Environment (Diffuse Pollution) (Scotland) Regulations 2008 (SSI 2008/54)<br />Crofting Counties Agricultural Grants (Scotland) Amendment Scheme 2008<br />(SSI 2008/58)
There are eight statutory instruments for our consideration under agenda item 4. The first two instruments are carried over from our meeting on 19 March. [Interruption.] Can people in the public gallery please take their conversations outside? Thank you.
The answer is that I am not sure.
While John is having a look at that, we will move on to SSI 2008/58, on which Peter Peacock raised concerns. There has been correspondence between me and the cabinet secretary. Peter, do you want to comment on the cabinet secretary's response?
I appreciate that we are up against time, with the deadline being tomorrow. The cabinet secretary's response cites the EU requirements as a large part of the reason why the action is being taken. It might be interesting to know at some future date the extent to which the EU has been questioned on those requirements. That said, the correspondence usefully points out that the powers will be used only "in extremis", after an applicant has been given a chance to comply and where there is a reasonable belief that the seizure of a computer would be absolutely necessary in the circumstances. Now that we have those assurances, I am happy not to object any further.
Do we agree to make no recommendation in relation to SSI 2008/58?
Has John Scott had an opportunity to locate his paperwork on SSI 2008/54?
Yes. I am happy with the explanation and further information that the cabinet secretary provided.
As no other member wishes to comment on SSI 2008/54, do we agree to make no recommendation on it?
Horses (Zootechnical Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 2008 (SSI 2008/99)<br />Rural Development Contracts (Rural Priorities) (Scotland) Regulations 2008 <br />(SSI 2008/100)
Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2007 (Fixed Penalty Notices) Order 2008 (SSI 2008/101)<br />Sea Fishing (Control Procedures for Herring, Mackerel and Horse Mackerel) (Scotland) Order 2008 (SSI 2008/102)
Eggs and Chicks (Scotland) Regulations 2008 (SSI 2008/129)<br />Forestry Challenge Funds (Scotland) Regulations 2008 (SSI 2008/135)
We come to the six remaining instruments. The Subordinate Legislation Committee has not yet considered SSI 2008/129 and SSI 2008/135, so I advise the committee that we will carry them over to our meeting on 30 April, to wait for the Subordinate Legislation Committee to comment. Do members have any views on that?
That would be sensible. Can I raise a question on one of the other instruments?
Can we deal with SSI 2008/129 and SSI 2008/135 first? Do we agree to hold those instruments over until 30 April to allow the Subordinate Legislation Committee to comment?
I have a question about SSI 2008/100.
That is on rural development contracts.
Yes. Regulation 8 states:
John Scott has questions, too.
Yes, also on SSI 2008/100. I am concerned about rights of appeal. We have had assurances from the cabinet secretary that the issue is being addressed, but notwithstanding the fact that a group is considering the issue, I want to know whether the right of appeal that we are introducing in the regulations will be set in stone for the next six or seven years. There was a manifesto commitment from the Government to address the issue sympathetically, but I am not sure from reading the regulations whether they do that. Obviously, the matter is germane to the industry.
Mike, on page 3 of the regulations, there is a slight expansion of the rural priorities statement. It is about two thirds of the way down the page in the interpretation provision of the regulations. You may feel that it is still not enough.
It is too vague.
I think that we have time to reconsider the regulations and, in the meantime, ask for clarification from the cabinet secretary on the points that Mike Rumbles and John Scott made. Do we agree to hold over SSI 2008/100 as well?
I should say that, although no issues have been raised on the other instruments and no motions to annul have been lodged, the Subordinate Legislation Committee commented on SSI 2008/99, SSI 2008/101 and SSI 2008/102. Are any of its comments of interest to any member of the committee?
I put it on record that the work that the Subordinate Legislation Committee has done is valuable. It has pointed out errors to the Scottish Government, which the Government has acknowledged, particularly in SSI 2008/101. We should acknowledge the fact that the Government has admitted the errors and will address them at the earliest opportunity.
There being no other comments, do we agree to make no recommendations in relation to SSI 2008/99, SSI 2008/101 and SSI 2008/102?
I suggest that we do not recirculate the instruments, given the considerable paperwork that is involved.
I am advised that, as a matter of course, we do not recirculate them in such circumstances. This meeting's set of papers was extremely bulky and I felt sorry for the posties who had to cart them around.
Previous
Pig Industry