Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Enterprise and Culture Committee, 08 Sep 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, September 8, 2005


Contents


Subordinate Legislation

The Convener:

Item 1 is on subordinate legislation. There are four instruments to deal with today. I will first introduce the officials from the Scottish Executive: Angela Lawson is a lawyer with the Executive; Valerie Sneddon is a policy executive with the additional needs support team in the funding for learners division; Anne Marie Hoey is a policy executive in the funding for learners division; and Susan Whittaker is a policy adviser in the higher education strategy and governance branch. I have agreed with the representatives from the Executive that we will move straight to questions on each instrument. They do not see any need to add to the notes that have already been circulated.


Edinburgh College of Art (Scotland)<br />Order of Council 1995 (Amendment)<br />Order of Council 2005 (SSI 2005/313)

The Convener:

The details of the response of the Subordinate Legislation Committee to the first instrument have been circulated to members. The committee had no comments on the instrument. These are negative instruments, so we can really only comment on them. Is everyone happy with the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.


Student Loans (Information Requests, Maximum Threshold, Maximum Repayment Levels and Hardship Loans) (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (SSI 2005/314)

The Convener:

The Subordinate Legislation Committee has expressed concern about the regulations and has drawn some defective drafting to the attention of the Enterprise and Culture Committee and the Parliament. Christine, you are on the Subordinate Legislation Committee. Do you want to add anything?

Christine May (Central Fife) (Lab):

I was on the committee until the end of June. I remember the regulations coming through and I remember the matter being raised. The Executive has acknowledged the problem but, as I recall, said that the drafting should not make a material difference. If the committee would like further clarification, the advisers may be able to help.

Would anyone from the Executive like to comment?

Anne Marie Hoey (Scottish Executive Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Department):

We understand that a few points were raised by the Subordinate Legislation Committee and we are happy to redraft the explanatory note taking into account any concerns.

Do you see the need to make any additional changes to the regulations? Is there anything substantial that you need to correct?

Angela Lawson (Scottish Executive Legal and Parliamentary Services):

We have taken on board the comments of the Subordinate Legislation Committee in relation to the overseas borrowers. The issue was that a more detailed explanation was required. We feel that that could be given in the explanatory note, if that was considered to be sufficient. We are obviously willing to hear about any further concerns that the committee may have.

We apologise for the error of putting "£108" rather than "£100" in the explanatory note. We were going to change the explanatory note in any event, so we can give further clarification on the point that has been raised about overseas borrowers, if that would be helpful.

The committee will be aware of a letter that was sent to the Subordinate Legislation Committee on 1 July. The letter explained the meaning of when requests have been made and when actions have been completed; it also gave some legal precedents. We had hoped that that letter would have clarified any doubts as to when a particular document has been delivered. The legal precedents show that a document has been delivered once the action has been completed—that is, once the document has actually been received by the recipient. We think that that offers sufficient clarity without the need to amend the regulations, but we are open to further comments from the committee.

Christine May:

I am grateful to the Executive for that clarification. The amendment to the explanatory notes should be adequate. There was difficulty in understanding the meaning of "made" and "delivered" and I am sure that the Subordinate Legislation Committee found the precedents helpful. I imagine that the committee will have considered that—although, of course, I would not have been at the meeting.

Are members happy with what they have heard?

Members:

Yes.


Education (Graduate Endowment, Student Fees and Support) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2005 (SSI 2005/341)

We move now to the third instrument that we have to consider. The Subordinate Legislation Committee draws our attention and that of the Parliament to a failure to follow proper drafting practice.

Valerie Sneddon (Scottish Executive Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Department):

We take the comments of the Subordinate Legislation Committee on board. As stated in this committee's background notes, we replied to the Subordinate Legislation Committee to say that drafting issues arose in relation to the committee's second and third points and that we would be putting through amendment regulations to fix them. We will take out the extra reference to "relevant day" and we will put in references to "excepted student" and "excepted candidate".

On the committee's first point, we got back to the committee to say that we thought that the definition of

"national of a member state of the European Community"

was clear from the context. However, we appreciate that the Subordinate Legislation Committee still has issues with that and we will be happy for the amendment regulations to remove that definition and ensure that the provision is clearer.

Are committee members satisfied with that?

Members:

Yes.


Education (Student Loans) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (SSI 2005/345)

The Convener:

We come now to the final instrument that we have to consider today. The Subordinate Legislation Committee is happy with this one—and it is a much more difficult committee to satisfy than we are. I thank the Executive officials for their attendance.