Official Report 109KB pdf
Public Health etc (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
When I read our legal brief I was impressed by the positive outcome of the dialogue that we have had with the Scottish Government. Members will see from the brief that there have been moves and concessions. Without blowing the committee's trumpet, we are getting quite good at working with the Scottish Government.
On section 19, "Notifiable diseases etc: further provision", we were concerned with the scope of the power in section 19(1)(a)(v) combined with section 19(2), so we sought the Scottish Government's comments on the suggestion that the power could be further narrowed.
On section 98, "Disclosure of information", we asked whether the power could be narrowed because we were concerned about the potential effect on individuals of the sharing of sensitive data. Are we content with the response? Do we consider that the further justification provided by the Scottish Government is reasonable, and that the power to specify additional relevant authorities is acceptable, given the constraints placed on such authorities, and that specification of a body that did not have public health functions would be an abuse of the power under section 98(8)?
That concludes the committee's consideration of the bill.
Glasgow Commonwealth Games Bill: Stage 1
Again, I believe that we have had a constructive dialogue on the bill. Let us go through it bit by bit.
Section 2 is on trading regulations. Are we content to draw the lead committee's attention to the long list of points in the summary of recommendations?
Section 10 is on advertising regulations. Are we content to follow the same approach to that taken in relation to the power to make trading regulations?
On section 19, "Use of internet etc", are we content to follow the same approach to that taken in relation to the power to make trading regulations?
On section 21, "Enforcement of Games offences", are members content to draw the attention of the lead committee to our dissatisfaction with the broadly framed power in subsection (1), although we note that the Scottish Government intends to use the power for procedural and not substantive matters?
Are we therefore content to press the Scottish Government to restrict exercise of this power by amending the administrative provisions referred to in sections 22(2)(b) and 31(2)? The committee will scrutinise the detail of the provisions at stage 2 to ensure that the power is narrowed to cover administrative matters. Is that agreed?
On section 47, "Ancillary provision", are we content to report to the lead committee that we are not satisfied with the width of the power in subsection (1), which will have the effect of modifying or disapplying—and thus changing the effect of—the bill or any act; and that we are not satisfied that the Scottish Government has provided sufficient justification for a departure from the presumption in favour of the affirmative procedure in circumstances where a delegated power includes the power to amend or modify primary legislation?
Are we also content to ask the lead committee to probe the Scottish Government at stage 1 for further justification for the use of the power and the use of the negative procedure?
Finally, are we content to inform the Scottish Government that the committee considers that further justification for the use of the power by way of the negative procedure is required in light of the presumption in favour of the affirmative procedure in circumstances where the power includes the power to amend the application and effect of primary legislation, albeit temporarily?
That takes us to section 50, "Repeal". Are members content to inform the Scottish Government that, although the committee appreciates that a fixed time limit on the bill's duration might not be appropriate in light of administrative matters, the committee expects regulations made under the bill to be time limited?
Are we also content to state in our report to the lead committee that we do not consider that regulations made under the bill will be subject to a natural time limitation in the circumstances in which events taking place after the games may be designated as games events?
Are we content to draw the attention of the lead committee and the Scottish Government to the time limitations of regulations made under the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006?
The 2006 act shows that Westminster has already done a job of work; we could perhaps pick up some useful tips that would benefit the Scottish Government.