Justice 1 Committee, 17 Dec 2003
Meeting date: Wednesday, December 17, 2003
Official Report
258KB pdf
Civil Partnership Registration
Agenda item 4 is on civil partnership registration; I refer members to the paper that has been prepared by the reporter, Margaret Smith, assisted by Marlyn Glen and the clerks. Would Margaret Smith like to say a few words about the detailed paper that is before us?
I will not take up too much time, but I would like record my thanks, and those of Marlyn Glen, to the clerks for their work on the paper.
Section 7 shows the devolved matters that will be handled in a complex Sewel motion. As things stand, we do not know when we will get the motion, so it is useful for us and, particularly, the Equal Opportunities Committee to do this work before the motion comes along.
Section 13 contains two key points that pick up on points that were made at the Equal Opportunities Committee by the Law Society of Scotland and others. First, there is a need for the Executive to do a proper audit of all the implications of the Sewel motion because it will affect many parts of Scots law. Secondly, because of the complexity of the matter, when the bill and the Sewel motion are brought before Parliament, it is critical that we and the Equal Opportunities Committee have enough parliamentary time to consider the provisions in detail and to take evidence, if necessary.
All that we have done so far is take evidence on a consultation paper. We have flagged up some mistakes that have been made in that consultation paper on Scots law vis-à-vis divorce; there might be other mistakes, and changes that might have to be made, by the time that the bill is published. The bill will be pretty complex and we will need around five to seven weeks to be able to scrutinise it properly and see the differences and the key issues for Scotland. We should give ourselves the opportunity to take evidence, if we want to, and to pick up on particular legal points in sufficient time for the bill to be passed through the Sewel motion process.
The Equal Opportunities Committee, of which I am a member, has considered the bill and although we focused on some of the mistakes and the complexity in the consultation, fundamentally we considered whether the bill was right vis-à-vis equal opportunities and human rights. We focused on that much more closely than we did on the legal aspects of the bill, in the same way that the Justice 1 Committee will focus on the legal aspects when the bill is published.
Marlyn, do you want to add anything?
No. That was a full account of what the Equal Opportunities Committee did, but it looks as if there is still a lot of work to do, and it would be useful to separate out the work that the two committees will do.
I have a concern about something in the conclusion section. Paragraph 12 states that
"The proposals for the creation of civil partnership registration in Scotland are welcomed",
but I do not know whether I welcome them. I have not had an opportunity to study the proposals in detail or to go through the evidence.
When we acted as a secondary committee previously, we did not refer to the general principles. If I recall correctly, we focused on the specific legal aspects and the impact of the proposed legislation on Scots law. I might welcome the proposals once I have seen the bill, but at this stage I do not know that I do. I am concerned that the line that I have quoted could be construed as the Justice 1 Committee saying to the Executive and to Westminster that it welcomes the proposals, irrespective of what those proposals are. I want to see the legislation first.
I agree that it would not be appropriate to say one way or the other.
At this stage, we could just say that the proposals are noted. It is crucial that we do not have the bill in front of us and that we do not know what will be in the published bill. It is also crucial that we do not know what will happen to the bill as it goes through the Westminster process. Ministers have told us that if the bill is changed fundamentally during that process, it might have to come back to the Scottish Parliament under a second Sewel motion. We are at the beginning of a process.
Hence my concerns.
The paper is right to identify the importance of
"A detailed review of the impact of legislation"
and
"Sufficient parliamentary time … to allow detailed scrutiny of the provisions of the legislation affecting Scotland".
The paper recommends that I, as convener of the Justice 1 Committee, should discuss the division of the work with the Equal Opportunities Committee. Are those issues agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
With the proviso that I have mentioned.
Yes. That is agreed.