Procedures Committee, 20 Jun 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, June 20, 2000

Official Report 191KB pdf

---

Rule 9.17 (Private Bills)

Item 1 on the agenda is a report on the adequacy of rule 9.17 of standing orders. The committee is invited to note the position and agree to receive an issues paper in due course. There is a substantial annexe to the report, which identifies several concerns over procedures. It is felt that the legislation might be inoperable in its current form. We must get it into a workable form by November in case private bills are lodged. Fergus Cochrane is here to answer any questions that members may have.

I was fascinated by this report. When we read the standing orders, many of us were unaware that we were going to build railways and harbours and do the other interesting things that private bills call for. It may be helpful to include in the issues paper some suggestion of the likely frequency of private bills. The experience in the House of Commons in recent years suggests that such bills will not be introduced frequently. However, some indication of their frequency would be useful, from analysis of past introductions of private bills.

The paper refers to the way in which private bills are set out, and it might help if members could see an example of a private bill. I do not think that I have ever read a private bill, therefore it would be helpful to see how one is constructed.

Those two items might help our deliberations when we receive the issues paper.

We can ask Fergus Cochrane about that. Am I right in thinking that the recent press reports about Edinburgh Waverley station concern a private bill?

Yes. The Waverley private legislation is going through the private legislation system at Westminster. I could not comment on whether that matter would be appropriate for the Scottish Parliament, as I have not seen the content of the bill.

We are aware that some promoters are planning to lodge private legislation in the foreseeable future. They have been holding off until the Parliament's position became clear. We have had preliminary discussions with one or two organisations, which have said that they are planning to lodge private bills fairly shortly.

The volume of private bills has decreased over the years. On occasions in the past, there were half a dozen private bills in a year. The average number is now one or two a year, but there are three or four promoters who are planning to lodge bills.

Essentially, the process is responsive to demand; it is not like a Government's legislative programme. A lot of private bills have been railways bills, but it would be useful to know whether the on-going transfer of powers—and a lot of them have not fully transferred yet—will bring railway procedures. If that is the case, we can anticipate that some legislation will be forthcoming from time to time. Such bills tend to involve land acquisition and compulsory purchase powers, which people in the private sector or the non-governmental world would not normally enjoy. They could, however, be reasonably significant.

It would be useful if an example could be circulated to committee members. It would also help to have some indication of the frequency of private bills over the past 10 years, so that we will have some idea of what we might be talking about. It is a fascinating subject. The great days of the 19th century railways bills may be past, but it is an interesting aspect of legislation that this Parliament has not yet explored.

I can certainly have information passed to the convener.

Thanks very much.

Are we agreed that we will deal with the report when we receive it in due course?

Members indicated agreement.