Communities Committee, 06 Sep 2006

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 6, 2006

Official Report 261KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Automated Registration of Title to Land (Electronic Communications) (Scotland) Order 2006 (Draft)

The third agenda item is subordinate legislation, for which the Deputy Minister for Communities, Johann Lamont, is accompanied by Mark Richards from the office of the solicitor to the Scottish Executive and Ken Young from the Registers of Scotland.

As members are aware, the draft order is an affirmative instrument, so the minister is required under rule 10.6.2 of standing orders to propose by motion that it be approved. Committee members have received copies of the draft order and its accompanying documentation. I invite the minister to speak briefly to the instrument, but she should not move the motion yet.

The draft order will be made under powers that were conferred by the Electronic Communications Act 2000, section 8 of which permits ministers by order to modify the provisions of any enactment for the purpose of authorising or facilitating the use of electronic communications. Section 9(7) of that act provides that, in respect of matters that are not reserved, the power is exercisable by the Scottish ministers with the secretary of state's consent.

The instrument proposes technical modifications to the Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995 and the Land Registration (Scotland) Act 1979. The changes will enable the introduction of automated registration of title to land, which the Keeper of the Registers of Scotland is developing with the support of stakeholders, which include the Law Society of Scotland, the Council of Mortgage Lenders and the Scottish Consumer Council. The draft order introduces an optional process under which deeds that affect property may be created and transmitted as electronic communications that will automatically update the land register of Scotland.

The new process will permit faster, cheaper and more accurate registration and I hope that the committee will feel able to support the order that proposes it.

Do any members have questions?

The order is to be welcomed although, as a former solicitor, I am always printing off documents to ensure that I have them in paper form and I suspect that other people may do the same.

I want to press you on the consultation. The Executive's note says:

"Those who responded to the consultation were largely content with the proposed order."

Will you put on record what criticisms were made?

We got 10 responses, which were generally supportive of proposals that will enhance and improve the system and help people to make the process efficient. A number of practical points were made, which I will ask the officials to clarify.

As Johann Lamont said, in general the responses were supportive and positive. A number of Scottish academic lawyers, including Professor Ken Reid of the Scottish Law Commission and a group of four university professors, made specific technical points on different aspects of the order, which we incorporated into the order's present form when that was possible. They did not say anything particularly negative.

I have always found Professor Reid scary, so I would not like to tangle with him.

We are talking about a system that is voluntary—there is no proposal to make it mandatory.

That is interesting; I had not realised that. Do you have any information on what the take-up will be?

Yes. We have take-up predictions that indicate that, if we are lucky, about 500 firms of solicitors will be using automated registration of title to land by late summer next year. The roll-out begins in November this year with some live testing and it will begin properly in late January next year—we wanted to miss the Christmas and new year season.

What proportion of the total number of firms of solicitors is 500?

I am not sure, but I think that there are about 1,200 firms of solicitors in Scotland, not all of which will do conveyancing, of course.

So about half the firms will use the new system.

As there are no further questions from committee members, I ask the minister to move motion S2M-4583.

Motion moved,

That the Communities Committee recommends that the draft Automated Registration of Title to Land (Electronic Communications) (Scotland) Order 2006 be approved.—[Johann Lamont.]

Motion agreed to.

Do members agree to report our decision on the order to Parliament?

Members indicated agreement.

I thank the minister for attending and suspend the meeting to allow her and her officials to leave.

Meeting suspended.

On resuming—

---

Town and Country Planning (Application of Subordinate Legislation to the Crown) (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Order 2006 (SSI 2006/339)

Item 4 on the agenda is also subordinate legislation. SSI 2006/339 is the last of a set of instruments laid under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 that concern the removal of Crown immunity from planning control. Members will recall dealing with related instruments.

The order applies the Town and Country Planning (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Rules 1997 and the Town and Country Planning Appeals (Determination by Appointed Person) (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Rules 1997 to the Crown. It also modifies various rules relating to the procedure to be followed at planning inquiries to take account of the new provisions that deal with the appointment of persons to represent the interests of anyone who is prevented from hearing or inspecting evidence at a planning inquiry that is subject to a national security direction. The order also makes provision in relation to applications for development that are certified by the Crown body as being of national importance and required urgently.

The Subordinate Legislation Committee did not have any comments to make on the order. Do members have any comments to make on it?

I am interested in it. It seems to me from the Executive's note that the order will be more liberating. I do not know about the historic position, but members may know that the approach to Crown immunity has been more rigorous. The order tries to introduce a more democratic approach, subject to certain reservations—which I understand—but I would be interested in examples of restrictions. I do not know whether the committee has previously discussed such examples.

The Executive's note refers to "Security Sensitive Information". Information about Faslane is an obvious example in that context, but given that we are now in a different world in which there are potential terrorist targets that the order might encompass, I wonder about other kinds of security-sensitive information. I also wonder how things will operate between Westminster and the Scottish Parliament, as we are talking about a reserved matter that affects buildings and places on our soil.

The section of the Executive's note entitled "Urgent Applications" says that

"reductions in time periods … are of significance where a nationally important development is required urgently".

I would like to know what such developments would be. That there would be clampdowns under the two categories that have been mentioned for reasons that may be appropriate is important.

Finally, although I understand the terms "closed evidence" and "open statement of case", I do not know about the term "appointed representative". I think that there would be an appointed representative when people who would normally be able to be part of a planning inquiry are debarred from it for reasons of security or whatever, although I do not know whether the process would involve an advocate. We now operate in a different Scotland in which terrorist attacks are possible, and I would like clarity. More things might be involved than used to be involved.

Would you be content to agree to the order today if we agreed to write to the minister to ask for clarification of the circumstances in which the Executive envisaged the order being used?

Yes. I have raised issues to be recorded in the Official Report because the explanatory note does not provide a sufficient explanation of the changed circumstances.

I am sure that the minister will be able to supply us with the information that we want.

Is the committee content with the order?

Members indicated agreement.

The committee will therefore not make any recommendation on the order in its report to the Parliament. Do members agree that we report to the Parliament on our decision on the order?

Members indicated agreement.

We will write to the minister to seek the clarification that Christine Grahame has requested.

Meeting closed at 11:53.