Health and Sport Committee, 23 Sep 2009

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Official Report 189KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Meat (Official Controls Charges) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/262)

We move on to the final item on the agenda, which is consideration of five negative instruments. Members have a copy of each instrument, as well as a note from the clerk.

The Meat (Official Controls Charges) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 provide the basis for charging for official controls that are conducted to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law and animal health and welfare when animals are slaughtered for human consumption. The Subordinate Legislation Committee asked the Scottish Government two questions on the compliance of slaughterhouses with European Commission regulations and reported to us that it was content with the response that it received.

If members have no comments, is the committee content not to make any recommendation on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Feed (Hygiene and Enforcement) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/263)

The regulations amend existing regulations to grant enforcement powers to the Food Standards Agency in relation to animal feed hygiene. The Subordinate Legislation Committee raised several issues with the Scottish Government to do with the clarity of the regulations and the powers that they confer on ministers. The committee reported that the regulations could have been clearer in setting out the limitations of the enforcement powers granted and that normal drafting practice was not followed, in that there was a failure to reference other relevant instruments.

Do members have any comments?

I would not have thought that the lack of a reference point would have any real impact on the regulations. Why has the Subordinate Legislation Committee flagged up the issue? Is it just being very, very—

That is what the Subordinate Legislation Committee does.

The issue has come up on previous occasions. I am afraid that not following good drafting practice is a pretty frequent occurrence.

The options are that we can decide that we are content with the regulations; we can request that a Government official appear before us; or we can move a motion to annul the regulations. Do we want to follow any of those routes? Shall we agree to make no recommendation on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.

I think that Rhoda Grant has just volunteered for the Subordinate Legislation Committee.

Oh dear—although I will not call it a gulag because I know that Helen Eadie is on it. We are not to call it that; it is a very important committee.

It is not just me who is on it.

I know. Ian McKee is on it, too. I think that that is where the Canadian proposal came to light, but we will not dwell on that, as our discussion is still being recorded by the official report.

---

Natural Mineral Water, Spring Water and Bottled Drinking Water (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/273)

The regulations amend existing regulations by implementing in Scotland directive 2009/54/EC, on the exploitation and marketing of natural mineral waters. The Subordinate Legislation Committee reported that the regulations breached the 21-day rule that applies to the period between the laying and the coming into force of a negative instrument but that it was content with the Food Standards Agency's explanation.

If members have no comments, is the committee content not to make any recommendation on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.

---

National Health Service (Optical Charges and Payments) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/288)

The regulations amend existing regulations to add an additional category of person to whom payments are to be made by a health board for the supply of an optical appliance. The Subordinate Legislation Committee raised an issue with the Scottish Government because it appeared that regulation 8(2A) had a retrospective effect without the authority of the parent statute, which would mean that it breached the general principle that subordinate legislation may not have retrospective effect unless that is expressly provided for in the enabling powers.

In its response, the Government stated that the parent regulations allow for the descriptions of persons to whom the regulations apply

"by reference to any criteria".

The Government considers the setting of a date on or after which such reimbursement applies to be part of the reasonable criteria that it can specify. The Subordinate Legislation Committee was not convinced that setting a retrospective date was covered under reasonable criteria.

The committee also reported that the instrument breached the 21-day rule but was satisfied with the Government's explanation. In light of that, the committee drew the regulations to our attention and to Parliament's attention on the ground that they apply retrospectively even though they do not have the explicit power to do so under the parent regulations.

If members have no comments, is the committee content not to make any recommendation on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Public Health etc (Scotland) Act 2008 Designation of Competent Persons Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/301)

The regulations prescribe the qualifications and training for persons to be known as health board and local authority competent persons for the purpose of exercising specified public health functions under the Public Health etc (Scotland) Act 2008. We are glad that we do not have similar regulations for MSPs. The Subordinate Legislation Committee had no comments to make on the regulations.

If members have no comments, is the committee content to make no recommendation on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.

We now move on to item 5, which is consideration of the committee's approach to its draft report on the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Bill. As agreed, this item will be taken in private.

Meeting continued in private until 12:31.