Subordinate Legislation Committee,

Meeting date: Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Official Report 188KB pdf

---

Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Bill: as amended at Stage 3

Our final agenda item concerns a provision of the Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Bill that confers a power to make amendments by a resolution of the Scottish Parliament

Members will recall that an amendment was lodged at stage 3 to allow the Parliament to make by determination any modification to the schedule and that concerns were expressed in the chamber about how such a determination would work.

Members will note that the terminology in the amendment has been adjusted to refer to a "resolution" of the Parliament rather than a "determination". The draft amendment included with members' papers has been adjusted to remove subparagraph (3) after discussion between the committee's legal advisers and the non-Executive bills unit and after comments from Her Majesty's Stationery Office. It has also been adjusted to include provisions to allow for the publication of the resolution as if it were a Scottish statutory instrument. This is precedented in the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1948. Are members content to note the power?

The new wording is more helpful. Perhaps if the word "resolution" had been used the first time round we would not have had the difficulty in the stage 3 debate. I also welcome the fact that the resolution will be published as if it were an SSI. That is helpful.

I want to ask a question about paragraph 189 of the legal brief. What in particular has been adjusted? The paragraph says that the amendment in our papers

"has been adjusted in particular to remove subparagraph (3) after discussion between"

the various bodies that you mentioned, convener. What was the particular problem?

The reason was purely technical; it was so that they did not have to put in the "Scottish Statutory Instruments" heading. That is it, there. It was just the banner heading—

Yes, but I just wondered why that was a particular problem.

It was just telling HMSO about an operational detail that—

But it did not like it.

It did not like it.

You cannot just flourish a paper—you have to narrate it so that it can be taken down by the official reporters for the benefit of the avid readership of the deliberations of this committee.

I am assured that we have the copy.

The copy of what? You have to tell the official reporters.

Margaret, would you just say that again for the benefit of the Official Report? What happened in the discussions?

Subparagraph (3) said that the copy of the resolution that is sent to the Office of the Queen's Printer for Scotland shall not be required by article 5(2) of the transitional order to have the heading, "Scottish Statutory Instruments". It was felt that that was an operational detail that did not have to go in legislation.

Thank you.

What is the difference between a resolution and a determination? I am happy for there to be a clarification, but to me a resolution is exactly the same as a determination.

I am assured that there is no difference in this context.

So what exactly are we saying by using the word "resolution" that we were not saying earlier by using the word "determination"? Does it mean that we would have to have a vote in Parliament? It does not, does it? We would have to have agreement.

Yes, but there would have been agreement the first time round as well.

Yes, but there does not have to be a vote; there could be agreement by consensus.

Yes, but there is still a vote. It would be a decision at decision time. Members would agree verbally, as they do. Even if there is not a negative answer to the question and then a formal vote, there is still a vote—the decision is taken. Whether that is called a determination or a resolution, there still has to be a parliamentary decision.

In either case, it is exactly the same as a determination, is it not? Parliament determines in a number of ways, but the meaning is that Parliament agrees, and therefore votes.

The word "resolution" is just meant to be a bit clearer and more reassuring. Obviously, not every member was as confident about this as Ken was. He spoke splendidly on behalf of the committee during the debate on amendments at stage 3. Indeed, he saved the day.

Thank you, Murray.

The stage 3 debate is on Thursday of this week. The committee does not report—any issues will have to be raised during the debate on Thursday. Only the member in charge of the bill can lodge amendments.

The next meeting of this committee will be on Tuesday 30 May.

Meeting closed at 11:34.