Official Report 95KB pdf
Community Care and Health (Scotland) Bill
Item 1 is the delegated powers scrutiny of the Community Care and Health (Scotland) Bill. A number of things have arisen regarding the bill. The committee can say, if members agree, that while we appreciate the need for flexibility in legislation such as this and can understand why the Executive has presented the bill in this way, it is almost skeletal in some respects. Therefore, we can ask the Executive whether or not there is sufficient room for democratic scrutiny of, and debate on, the principles of the bill. For example, is social care actually defined in the bill in a way that everyone can understand and that no one would challenge?
I have absolutely no disagreement with inviting officials along to give an explanation of certain aspects of the bill. I recognise the need in a bill such as this for a degree of flexibility, because there might be, in future years, the need to amend definitions. Having those powers in the bill allows such amendment of definitions without recourse to primary legislation. I have no great concerns about the bill and I am sure that any regulations that emerge with regard to the bill's definitions will be subject to intense democratic scrutiny. However, I am comfortable with officials being invited along to explore some of those issues.
I can see a lot of sense in what has been said, but this is a very important piece of legislation and I think that Parliament will want to have the opportunity to debate the measures in detail. Given that so much is left to delegated powers, there might be a democratic gap that we need to consider. It would be helpful to have the officials along to discuss that.
I agree that if we get the officials along we can get their thinking on the record. We might then be able to accept something that we might have been in doubt about if we had not asked them. It is a good tactic to ask them to come and talk about the bill. We can decide after that whether we want to make further recommendations.
Is there anything else that anyone wants to raise on the bill as presented today, or should we wait until we have the officials in front of us?
We should wait until the officials are here.
I will ask the clerk to expedite that.
The clerk can give them a flavour of the kind of discussion that we had.
Yes, although they can read the committee's report.
Indeed, but there might be more background information than the kind of discussion that we had during the legal briefing.
No one is antagonistic, but we are setting standards and precedents in the Parliament, not just for the content, but for the style of legislation. Therefore, it is reasonable that at this juncture in the life of such an important piece of legislation we understand what we are doing in case we are laying down precedents that we might not have anticipated.
School Education (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill
Agenda item 2 is delegated powers scrutiny of the School Education (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill. One or two points arose on the bill, but otherwise everyone will be pleased to hear that it is perfectly straightforward. There is the question—the committee can decide whether it is a minor one—of why two commencement orders are necessary. There are two distinct parts to the bill. One refers to the age at which parents can apply for a primary school place for their children. The other refers to the proposed new structure for the teaching profession that would see an end to assistant head teachers—painlessly, I have no doubt.
I think we should ask what the explanation for that is. It is no particularly big deal, but we should ask the Executive why the provisions will not commence on royal assent.
The clerk will arrange that.
Next
Executive Responses