Subordinate Legislation Committee, 26 Sep 2006

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Official Report 111KB pdf

---

Executive Responses

---

Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 (Consequential Provisions) Order 2006 (draft)

We asked the Executive two questions about the draft order. First, we asked it to explain the vires of paragraph 11 of schedule 1 to the order. Members will have seen the answer to that. The Executive refers to the Scotland Act 1998, the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and the non-reserved area of animal welfare. This is a slightly grey area. Animal welfare is devolved, but the subject matter of the 1986 act is reserved. There could be an argument about it. That said, the order relates to penalties for breaches of animal welfare provisions that are certainly within devolved competence.

In this case, subject to what members think, I suggest that we simply tell the lead committee and the Parliament that we asked for the information and got it.

Members indicated agreement.

No doubt, lawyers could sit on the head of a pin and argue about the vires of the provision, but I do not think that it is worth the gander.

They could do, but—

Why would they want to?

I have thought of a solution. If we had independence, we would not have this problem. Should we mention that?

I have never been keen on independence, but I now realise its importance as a result of dealing with this order. I will possibly have to reconsider my position.

Secondly, we asked the Executive to confirm that the sections of the 2006 act to which the order relates will be brought into force on or before the coming into force of the order. In its response, the Executive has confirmed that all the provisions to which the order relates, except sections 20(1) to 20(3), are to be commenced in the first commencement order under the act, which is due to be made by 6 October, in advance of the order.

The order is subject to the draft affirmative procedure and will come into force on the day after it is made. The timing of the debate on the order is therefore critical, especially as it appears that the relevant commencement order has not been made. If the order comes into force before the various provisions of the 2006 act, a gap will be left in the legislation that will be amended by the order, which is clearly undesirable.

We should draw the draft order to the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament on the ground that the provisions of the 2006 act that are referred to have yet to be commenced. I assume that the Executive will get them commenced in time. If it does not, we can always say, "We told you about that."

---

Robert Gordon University (Transfer and Closure) (Scotland) Order 2006 <br />(SSI 2006/461)

The closure of the university seems to be working well because we cannot get anybody up there to tell us anything.

We asked the Executive about article 5(3) of the order and whether transitional provisions are needed in relation to on-going matters at the date of transfer to the reconstituted university. The Executive has said that the university is responsible for drafting the order and that it has sought a reply from the university, but no one is in.

The committee must report on the order by 2 October—the day before our next meeting—in order to report within the 20 days that we are allowed. The Executive has undertaken to respond directly to the lead committee in time for its meeting on 3 October. I suppose that we could let it do that. However, we should point out that we are a little upset that we have not received the information that we requested. On the other hand, I assume that the lead committee will have the information in time.

The purpose of the Subordinate Legislation Committee in the procedure is to report to the lead committee. It is rather upsetting—to use your word, convener—that we cannot do so because we have not received the requested response from the Executive.

---

Environmental Noise (Scotland) Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/465)

We asked the Executive to explain the reasons for the late implementation of the European Union directive, which member states should have implemented on 18 July 2004. To be fair, the Executive's detailed response states that transposing the directive was particularly complex and technical. We should draw the regulations to the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament, and tell them what the problem has been and that the delay is regrettable, but that things have been explained.

---

Race Relations Act 1976 (Statutory Duties) (Scotland) Amendment Order 2006 <br />(SSI 2006/467)

We asked the Executive to confirm that, where necessary, the bodies to which the order refers have been added to the list of bodies in schedule 1A to the Race Relations Act 1976. That has been confirmed. We shall draw the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament to the order on the ground that further information was requested from and supplied by the Executive.

---

Local Government Pension Scheme (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/468)

The regulations are the fifth substantive amendment to the principal regulations. We asked the Executive—as we always do in such cases—whether it has any plans for consolidation. It has explained that the new local government pension scheme is currently being progressed and therefore it does not consider it appropriate to consolidate the principal regulations at this time. However, it is keeping the need for such consolidation under review. We shall draw that information to the attention of the Parliament and the lead committee.