Subordinate Legislation Committee, 22 Nov 2005

Meeting date: Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Official Report 276KB pdf

---

Executive Responses

---

Fundable Bodies (Scotland) Order 2005 (draft)

We move on to Executive responses, the first of which concerns the draft Fundable Bodies (Scotland) Order 2005. We asked the Executive to explain why the explanatory note that accompanies the order does not contain information on the content of schedule 2 to the Further and Higher Education (Scotland) Act 2005 and the meaning of "fundable body".

The Executive acknowledges that the explanatory note could have been more informative. It hopes that the committee will accept that the omission does not invalidate the effect of the order. Are members content to report the instrument on the ground of the defective drafting of the explanatory note?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Contaminated Land (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (draft)

The second response concerns the draft Contaminated Land (Scotland) Regulations 2005. Given our concerns about the complex changes to the instrument, we asked the Executive to consider the use of a Keeling schedule. Members will remember the point well.

The Executive has responded by saying that a Keeling schedule does not need to be included in the instrument given the nature of the amendments. However, it also makes reference to a consultation on the modification of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and says that it will consider the committee's comments on improving the clarity of the text of the instrument following the completion of the consultation.

Are members content to report the instrument to the lead committee and the Parliament on the basis of the Executive response?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Glasgow School of Art (Scotland) Amendment Order of Council 2005<br />(SSI 2005/525)

Two points arose on the instrument, the first of which was whether the Executive's intention was that the transitional provision in article 1 of the order should apply only to the governors who are elected. The Executive confirms that its intention is for the provision to apply only to the small group of governors who were either elected or appointed prior to 6 May 2003. The Executive acknowledges that the instrument is defectively drafted in that regard.

The second point, which was also on article 1, was that it was not clear whether the exception in article 1 was a personal exception or one that applied only for the duration of the present period of office of a governor. The committee will remember that Stewart Maxwell raised the point last week.

The Executive explains that the exception in article 1 is intended to be personal and is not limited to the present period of office for governors. The exception will no longer apply once the current maximum period of office of 12 years has been served in each case. The Executive further acknowledges that article 1 does not achieve the objective of disapplying article 2 for all the governors who were either elected or appointed prior to 6 May 2003. However, it says that, notwithstanding the drafting error, the order in council is not invalidated, but it confirms that it will consider whether to bring forward an amended instrument.

It would be good if the Executive were to agree that we should have the power to make such minor, textual amendments.

I knew that you were going to say that, Murray.

It would make life easier for the Executive, too.

The instrument gives us another example of that.

Are members content to report the instrument to the lead committee and the Parliament on the ground of defective drafting?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Education (Graduate Endowment, Student Fees and Support) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2005 (SSI 2005/545)

We asked the Executive about its plans for the consolidation of the regulations. It says that its intention is to consolidate the regulations before the beginning of the academic year 2006-07. Given that it has recently effected a further amendment to the regulations, it considers that the instrument does not represent an appropriate vehicle for consolidation. Are members happy simply to note the response to the lead committee and the Parliament?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Electricity from Non-Fossil Fuel Sources (Scotland) Saving Arrangements Order 2005 (SSI 2005/549)

We had two questions on the order. In relation to article 10(m), the committee asked for clarification of whether the amendment is intended to apply to payments that accrued prior to the original date of coming into force of section 33(10) of the Electricity Act 1989, or prior to the date of coming into force of the amendment. The Executive has said that the amendment is intended to apply to payments accrued before the coming into force of the new amendment. In the Executive's view, the words "this subsection" refer to the amending subsection. Are members content to report the order on the ground of defective drafting?

Members indicated agreement.

We also asked for an explanation of why the words "came into effect" have been used rather than the more usual reference to coming into force. The Executive explained that the phrase "into effect" is more appropriate than "into force", as the section that is being modified is no longer simply in force. I am waiting for Murray Tosh's comment.

Only Sir Humphrey could do that justice.

The Executive acknowledges that the explanatory note could have been clearer to help the reader. Are members content to report that matter to the lead committee and the Parliament?

Members indicated agreement.