Subordinate Legislation Committee, 29 Oct 2002

Meeting date: Tuesday, October 29, 2002

Official Report 109KB pdf

---

Instruments Subject to Annulment

---

Instruments Subject <br />to Annulment

---

Bovines and Bovine Products (Trade) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2002 (SSI 2002/449)

A question of asterisks arose on the regulations. The schedule to the regulations, which inserted new schedules 1, 2 and 3 into the principal regulations, seemed to have missing footnotes. The headings for the second and third columns in each inserted schedule had an asterisk, but with no explanation as to what that symbol meant. The principal regulations contain a footnote that says:

" * To be completed in respect of each approval".

The committee suggested that perhaps a similar footnote should have been included in the amendment regulations.

The Executive advises that each of the regulations in the principal regulations that refers to schedules 1, 2 and 3 makes it clear that the requirements of columns 2 and 3 in the schedules have to be met. In practice, during the approval process, the Executive requests the information in relation to columns 2 and 3 of the respective schedules from the applicant. That request is made by providing forms based upon the respective schedules and accompanied by guidance notes on how to complete the forms.

Does everybody follow me so far?

I was waiting for Reggie Perrin to come through the door. [Laughter.]

We are laughing about it, but the presence of the asterisk is misleading. It is incumbent on us to draw the instrument to the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Was the asterisk unsupported?

I think that it had inverted commas round it.

---

Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Exemptions for Disabled Persons) (Scotland) Regulations 2002 (SSI 2002/450)

The Executive has acknowledged the defective drafting. We should simply draw the regulations to the attention of the lead committee and the Parliament. The Executive has said that it will introduce an amending instrument to delete the references to section 6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 in regulations 6 and 7. That appears to dispose of the matter satisfactorily.

---

Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2002 (SSI 2002/451)

No points arise on the instrument. However, it is interesting that the regulations relate to

"disabled person's badges issued in Northern Ireland or any member State".

In this instance, Northern Ireland gets to issue its own badge, but we do not get to do that. That is a shame.

Northern Ireland has always had separate social security provisions.

Och, you are being so pedantic. I feel that a saltire would be nice.

If you want to march down the streets of Northern Ireland with a saltire, far be it from me to stop you.

---

Scottish Local Government Elections Rules 2002 (SSI 2002/457)

The rules contain a serious error. There are four points on which we might consider asking the Executive for clarification. Rule 31(1)(b) provides for a voter

"who declares orally an ability to read".

That produces a wonderful vision of the conversation: "Can you read?" "I can read." "Well read, then."

We assume that that is a mistake and that the paragraph should read "inability". We should clarify that.

Another matter is the question why schedule 3(4) purports to add a new paragraph (5) to rule 21 when that rule has only three paragraphs. That is another wee mistake.

The drafter was overexcited.

A further matter is the question why schedule 3(17) makes reference to the words "counting of votes" in rule 37 when the phrase that is actually used in that rule is "counting of the votes".

I would not get wildly upset about that, but never mind.

We would want to ensure that the relevant votes are counted, rather than votes in general.

I suppose that there have been some elections in which votes have been counted, but not the votes that should have been.

Yes, but that was in Chicago. [Interruption.] Brian Fitzpatrick is indicating that he was not thinking about Chicago at all. I wonder where else that could have happened.

Another matter is the question why schedule 1, which revokes the 1986 rules and some amending rules from 1999, omits the amending rules from 1990, that is, the Scottish Local Elections Amendment Rules 1990 (SI 1990/262).

Those are substantive mistakes, so we must ask the Executive to note our comments.

---

Combined Police Area Amalgamation Schemes 1995 Amendment (No 2) (Scotland) Order 2002 (SSI 2002/458)<br />Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Act 2002 (Transitory and Transitional Provisions) Order 2002 (SSI 2002/469)

No points arise in relation to these instruments.