Subordinate Legislation Committee, 18 Jan 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 18, 2000

Official Report 78KB pdf

---

Beef Bones (Scotland) Regulations 1999 (SSI 1999/186)

Various questions were raised about these regulations. It appears that there may still be some matters that we need to bring to the attention of Parliament and the lead committee. The Executive's response to question 2 in terms of definitions is outstanding; the confusion has not been clarified. We should draw to the attention of the lead committee that there appears to be confusion in the use of various words, particularly "occupier".

In its answer to question 1 the Executive says that the UK Administration communicated its intentions to the European Commission on 2 December 1999. Last week we raised the concern that, given the significance of the regulations in connection with the whole issue of exporting beef to the European Community, it may not be satisfactory just to send a letter to the Commission without any indication from it that such a method of proceeding is acceptable. We hope it is, but it would be good practice for the Commission to indicate whether the way the UK Administration is proceeding is correct.

That is a valid point. Just as we are trying to work out procedures between the Executive and ourselves, procedures can be worked out between it and Europe.

Another point raised with us was the penalties in regulation 8(3). Again, perhaps that should be brought to the attention of the lead committee.

It was also drawn to our attention that the style is following English drafting and that may not be justified. It might be better for some consideration to be given to having all matters drafted in a similar style, for our benefit and that of our successors, rather than some taking an English line but not others. We might suggest that, although probably nothing can be done about it at present, laying down a marker might be appropriate. Is that something else we should draw to the Executive's attention?

We have said before that we do not believe in drafting for drafting's sake and that it should be innovative, rather than following previously used styles.