Subordinate Legislation Committee, 26 Jan 2010

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Official Report 157KB pdf

---

Forth Crossing Bill: Stage 1

This is our first look at the bill, which contains a number of delegated powers. It is suggested that we deal only with those powers that our legal advisers have proposed we might want to raise with the Scottish Government. The proposal is that we consider the Government's response to points raised today at our meeting on 9 February, when we will also consider our stage 1 report. Is everyone happy to proceed in that way?

Members indicated agreement.

Section 11 is on "Special roads". We may wish to ask the Government to explain why it was considered appropriate that an order that could be made by the Scottish ministers by virtue of section 11(4), to vary or revoke a special roads scheme, should be subject to no parliamentary procedure. The roads that are listed in schedule 3 are to be special roads that will serve the new bridge as a national development. Section 143A of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 provides that a scheme under section 7 of that act, which authorises the carrying out of a national development, is subject to made affirmative procedure. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Section 76, on "Ancillary provision", enables ministers by order to make any supplementary, incidental or consequential provisions that are considered appropriate in connection with the bill. Such orders may modify any enactments, including the bill itself, or any instruments, some of which may have been subject to affirmative procedure. Such provisions also appear to be capable of affecting or interfering with private interests that will be affected by the bill. Are we content to ask the Scottish Government to justify why, in relation to some of the ancillary powers in section 76(1), negative procedure is considered to be an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny?

Members indicated agreement.

Section 77(1) is on "Crown application". It is suggested that we ask the Scottish Government the following questions. First, why does the power in section 77(1) require to be conferred on an "appropriate authority" to agree that any modifications of the bill's provisions can be made in relation to the application of the provisions to Crown interests?

Secondly, given that we assume that any such modifications could be agreed only for the purposes of the bill, which the Government acknowledges in the DPM to be restricted in scope to the detailed authorisation of the works to achieve the new crossing, could the power to modify be more narrowly drawn?

Thirdly, and finally, given that the effect of section 77(1) would be to allow an "appropriate authority" to modify any provision in its application to Crown interests without further parliamentary scrutiny, with whom is agreement required under the section? Should that be specified and so made clear in the provisions?

Can we agree to ask those three questions?

Members indicated agreement.