Subordinate Legislation Committee, 21 Sep 1999
Meeting date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999
Official Report
103KB pdf
National Health Service (General Dental Services) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 1999 (SSI 1999/51) Scottish Dental Practice Board Amendment Regulations 1999 (SSI 1999/52)
A minor matter has been flagged up on SSI 1999/52 that the committee may want to raise. Do we want to ask why it was thought necessary to include a definition of the term "health board"? We do.
Margaret Macdonald, our legal adviser, has also asked me to make a general point about instruments relating to the national health service. There may be a question of general competence in dealing with the professions, as they are a reserved matter, although the NHS is a devolved matter. The Executive appears satisfied that this matter is within its competence and I do not have any doubts that if we can run the NHS, we can regulate the professions that operate within it. However, anyone who wants to flag up the issue with the Executive should let me know so that we can consider whether to do so. If not, let us proceed.
The legal advisers have also raised a point about the amendments to the regulations. Does any member wish to comment about the numerous amendments being made to the regulations?
We should have a rule of thumb; perhaps five or six amendments would be acceptable, after which there should be consolidation. One piece of regulation has had seven amendments, which makes it impossible to go through the legislation to examine what has been changed.
Do we agree to ask the Executive to consider having, as a general principle, a rule of thumb about consolidation? "That should be done in the spirit of last week's questions—more in sorrow than in anger." Consolidation would benefit not only us, but people who need to keep track of the legislation that is coming in apace. Members are agreed to do so.
The committee also wonders why regulation 3(a) was necessary in SSI 1999/52, given section 11 of the Interpretation Act 1978. As I do not think that that issue is as substantive as the general principle, perhaps we should just write to the Executive for clarification.
We should bring the matter to the Executive's attention to ensure consistency in interpretation. Sometimes we receive redefinitions; sometimes we do not.