Subordinate Legislation Committee, 28 Feb 2006

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Official Report 114KB pdf

---

Executive Responses

---

Risk Assessment and Minimisation (Accreditation Scheme) (Scotland) Order 2006 (draft)

Last week, the committee asked whether the order ought to be consistent in relation to the notification of decisions and the provision to applicants of the reasons for decisions. Although specific provision on the giving of reasons is perhaps not strictly necessary, there is inconsistency in the regulations in that regard.

Are members content to report the order to the lead committee and the Parliament on the ground of failure to follow proper legislative practice due to inconsistent drafting?

Yes. The fact that guidance is being considered will help, but we should report the order in those terms.

The Executive says that the order would be "unduly cumbersome" if a requirement to give reasons for every decision was stated at every relevant point.

Members are content to report the instrument. Is that okay, Murray? You were here last week.

Yes.

---

Foot-and-Mouth Disease (Slaughter and Vaccination) (Scotland) Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/45)

The committee asked the Executive four questions on the regulations. First, the committee asked for confirmation that, in regulation 7(b), "the 1978 Order" is intended to refer to the order that is cited in regulation 7(a). The Executive confirms that that is the case.

Secondly, the committee sought clarification of the purpose of regulations 8(2)(a) and 9(1)(a)(i). The Executive has provided an explanation.

Thirdly, the Executive confirms that there is a drafting error in regulation 9 and that it will lodge an amendment to correct it.

In response to the committee's fourth question, on regulation 10(3), the Executive has provided an explanation.

Do members agree that we should draw the regulations to the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament? The regulations are on an important matter so I think that we should include in our report the questions that we asked and the explanations that the Executive has given. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

We should also point out the defective drafting on all four points. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

---

TSE (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/46)

Again, the committee asked four questions about the regulations. First, we asked whether the Executive has any plans to consolidate the regulations. The Executive has explained the reasons for the delay in consolidation. It has not been possible to match the timetable for consolidation that was set in England and Wales, but the Executive intends to undertake a consolidation exercise in 2006.

In response to the second question, the Executive agrees that there is ambiguity in the new regulation 7 and states that that will be clarified in the next set of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy regulations.

The Executive has provided an explanation in response to the committee's third question and, as far as the fourth question is concerned, it accepts that there is duplication.

I suggest that we report the regulations on the ground of defective drafting. The meaning of regulation 5(3) could have been clearer and there is confusing duplication in regulation 5(7). We acknowledge that those factors do not materially affect the interpretation of the regulations, but I suggest that we draw attention to those matters and to the other two responses as well. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

We should also mention that the Executive plans to consolidate the regulations.

Absolutely. It says that it will do so in 2006. Consolidation is an on-going issue that we have raised before and we want to keep a check on the various examples. One of the Westminster committees that deals with such matters is particularly good at checking these things.

---

Management of Offenders etc (Scotland) Act 2005 (Commencement No 1) Order 2006 (SSI 2006/48)

I ask members for their views on the Executive's explanation of the effect of sections 15(5) and 15(10) of the Management of Offenders etc (Scotland) Act 2005. Previously, the committee has remarked that it is desirable—and probably essential—that when any provision in legislation is commenced, all relevant provisions, such as definitions and conditions, should also be commenced. Should we draw the Executive's explanation to the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament? We should certainly say that there will be no adverse effect, but do members want to say anything else?

We should state that we do not consider that the order is an example of good practice.

I take it that what you have just recommended subsumes the recommendation that we draw attention to the unusually limited use of the power.

That is right. I missed that little bit out. I should have said that. Thank you.