Environment and Rural Development Committee,

Meeting date: Wednesday, May 3, 2006

Official Report 324KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Environmental Protection Act 1990:<br />Part IIA Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance: Edition 2 (SE 2006/44)

Agenda item 3 is subordinate legislation. We have one document to consider, which is subject to annulment. Members may recall that the committee considered a related document, the Contaminated Land (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (Draft), at our meeting on 7 December, when we took evidence from the Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development. The purpose of the draft guidance is to draw attention to the entry into force of changes to the contaminated land regime. The Subordinate Legislation Committee considered the guidance and had no comments to make on it. Do members have comments that they wish to make?

No.

Are colleagues therefore content with the draft guidance and happy to make no recommendation to the Parliament?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Sewerage Nuisance (Code of Practice) (Scotland) Order 2006 (SSI 2006/155)

Agenda item 4 is subordinate legislation. We have one statutory instrument to consider under the negative procedure. We have received some comments from the Subordinate Legislation Committee, and members have the relevant extract from that committee's report. Members will note that this is the final element of bringing into force the statutory code of practice on odour from waste water treatment works. We pressed the Executive hard to develop the code of practice after considering petitions during our scrutiny of the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, and it is good to see the order being produced. Funding has been provided in the quality and standards III programme to address problem sites. It is good to see the completion of this work. Do colleagues have any comments to make on the instrument?

It is important that petitioners in communities throughout Scotland realise that submitting petitions to the Scottish Parliament can result in legislative change that improves their lives. This is a classic example of that process, which I will use to encourage people in my region to bring more petitions to the Parliament to secure changes that will improve their environment.

I echo those thoughts. I hope that the money that has been made available under Q and S III will be enough to deal with the very large task that is involved. When Susan Deacon came along to the committee with the petitioners, we realised that they were highlighting only one of many such circumstances. I hope that all the people in those circumstances will be satisfied in the shortest time possible.

I thank colleagues for those comments. I take it that members are content with the instrument and happy to make no recommendation to the Parliament.

Members indicated agreement.