Act of Sederunt (Fees of Solicitors in the Sheriff Court) (Amendment No 2) 2009 (SSI/2009/321)
The next item is consideration of three negative instruments, the first of which is the Act of Sederunt (Fees of Solicitors in the Sheriff Court) (Amendment No 2) 2009. The Subordinate Legislation Committee sought clarification on why a savings provision had not been included in the act of sederunt. The committee received a reply from the secretary to the Lord President and was content with that response. As there are no comments, are members content to note the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Justice of the Peace Courts (Sheriffdom of North Strathclyde) etc Order 2009 (SSI 2009/331)
The Subordinate Legislation Committee did not draw any matters to the attention of the Parliament in relation to the order. As there are no questions, are members content to note the order?
Members indicated agreement.
Justice of the Peace Courts (Sheriffdom of South Strathclyde, Dumfries and Galloway) etc Order 2009 (SSI 2009/332)
The committee will recall that, in May, a similar instrument was annulled following the recommendation of the Justice Committee. The present order proposes closure of Cumnock, East Kilbride and Girvan courts but reprieves the court at Annan. The Subordinate Legislation Committee did not draw any matters to the attention of the Parliament in relation to the order. This morning, representations were received by the deputy convener from the local member, Cathy Jamieson, who, because of the parliamentary recess, has not yet had the opportunity to consider the matter and was not aware until today that the matter was to be considered. Members may wish to continue the matter in order to allow her to appear before the committee.
I ask colleagues whether we can defer consideration of the order until next week, not only to hear the local member but perhaps to have a couple of the relevant officials before us so that we can question them about why, although Annan has been reprieved—which is welcome news—Girvan and Cumnock have not. Are members happy to defer consideration of the order?
I think that that would be the accepted protocol, bearing in mind that the local member has had very limited information so far.
On the closure of East Kilbride district court, representations have come in from justices of the peace and others in the area, including South Lanarkshire Council, along the lines that East Kilbride is one of the biggest communities in Scotland and will be left without a court. I would like to see some figures about the background to this order. I appreciate that it is not far to Hamilton from East Kilbride, but it is nevertheless a big community to be left without a court of its own.
As the deputy convener has suggested, this is a matter that could be usefully pursued with the officials. Can we continue the matter to an early meeting, and invite the appropriate officials to give evidence and the local member to attend if she so desires?
Members indicated agreement.
Meeting continued in private until 16:37.
Previous
Draft Budget Scrutiny 2010-11