Subordinate Legislation
Agricultural Holdings<br />(Consequential Amendments) (Scotland) Order 2003 (Draft)
I welcome committee members, witnesses, the press and members of the public to the meeting. No apologies have been received, but I think that Karen Gillon is caught in traffic. I remind everyone to switch off their mobile phones.
Agenda item 1 is subordinate legislation. Copies of the Agricultural Holdings (Consequential Amendments) (Scotland) Order 2003 (Draft) have been circulated to members. The instrument is subject to the affirmative procedure, so the Parliament must approve it before it can be made. The Subordinate Legislation Committee reported on the draft instrument in its ninth report and made only one technical comment on it. Members have copies of an extract from the report.
We must consider a motion in the name of the Minister for Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie, that invites the committee to recommend to the Parliament that the instrument be approved. The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development, Allan Wilson, is here to move the motion. I welcome him and his officials.
Before we debate such motions, it is our usual practice to clarify any purely technical matters and to allow explanation of details while officials are at the table; the officials cannot participate in the debate once the motion has been moved. I invite the minister to introduce his officials and to make opening remarks.
Thank you, convener. I am accompanied by David Milne from the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department, Graham Fisher from the Office of the Solicitor to the Scottish Executive and our man from the legal department who will be happy to answer members' questions about the proposed order.
As its name suggests, the draft Agricultural Holdings (Consequential Amendments) (Scotland) Order 2003 makes consequential amendments to other legislation following the recent passing of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003. The draft order has been made principally using the order-making power that is contained in section 92 of the 2003 act.
The schedule to the act contains numerous consequential amendments to other legislation that arise from the act. However, we always recognised that the schedule was not complete and that other provisions would have to be considered and developed in a period of time that the tight bill timetable did not allow. That is why we included, on introduction, an explicit power to make such an order in the bill, as members will recall. Over the summer, we have developed, and consulted fully on, the proposals that are contained in the draft order.
The draft order will amend six acts. The purpose of each amendment is to ensure that those acts take account of the existence of the new types of tenancy that the 2003 act created, namely limited duration tenancies and short limited duration tenancies—LDTs and SLDTs. Those other acts deal with such matters as the compensation that is payable to a tenant farmer when compulsory acquisition of the land brings a tenancy to an end, and interaction with the rules on the protection of children in a tenant farmer's family. As a result, it could be said that the consequential amendments deal with issues that might not arise frequently in practice, but will be significant when they do arise. We have taken care to ensure that, as a result of the consequential amendments, the treatment of SLDTs and LDTs in those acts is consistent with how the acts already apply to other types of farm tenancy.
It might be helpful to the committee if I explain our intentions with regard to the implementation of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 itself. Two commencement orders have already brought into force some sections of the act. There is strong demand in the industry for the provisions of the 2003 act to come into force as soon as possible and in particular for the provisions to be available for Martinmas on 28 November, which is a significant term date in the industry. For those reasons, we intend to commence most of the act—other than the right-to-buy provisions in part 2—on 27 November.
The industry and professional advisers will expect as much notice of the details of the commencement arrangements as possible so that they can prepare for introduction. We therefore wish to sign the commencement order that will confirm the implementation date within the next 24 hours in order to provide the detailed advance notice that the industry and Parliament need. We delayed announcement of our intention to do so in order that the committee be told first.
I hope that the draft order will not prove to be contentious to committee members—I do not think that it will—and I commend it to them.
Thank you. Members have no factual questions to ask and do not want any clarification, so the minister's introductory remarks were obviously convincing.
Motion moved,
That the Environment and Rural Development Committee recommends that the draft Agricultural Holdings (Consequential Amendments) (Scotland) Order 2003 be approved.—[Allan Wilson.]
I remind members that rule 10.5.2 of the standing orders provides for up to 90 minutes' debate on the motion, although we need not use the whole 90 minutes.
I was going to say something, but the minister cleverly pre-empted everything that I was going to say in his opening remarks.
I have read through the draft order, which simply deals with consequential amendments. As a result, I fully support it. The primary reason for that is that, as the minister is well aware, the industry is keen for the provisions for LDTs and SLDTs to be brought in at the earliest possible opportunity. I therefore welcome the minister's announcement about likely implementation on 27 November.
It is important for the industry that the opportunity is given for the tenancies to come into existence. If, given that we are debating a piece of subordinate legislation, the minister chooses to make any closing remarks, I would appreciate an indication of the likely take-up on that date, and of whether any further work is necessary to encourage the agriculture industry to become involved in the new types of tenancy.
As there are no other questions from committee members, I invite the minister to respond to Alex Johnstone's questions.
We welcome Alex Johnstone's support for the measures. We have found widespread support throughout the industry for our proposals, and it would have been disrespectful to the committee to have made an announcement on their introduction without making an announcement here first.
It is impossible to predict the take-up at this point, but I assure Alex Johnstone that my officials will do everything in their power to encourage take-up of the measures in the 2003 act and to liaise effectively with the industry, as they have been doing, to ensure that the industry takes full advantage of the measures as they are introduced.
Motion agreed to.
That the Environment and Rural Development Committee recommends that the draft Agricultural Holdings (Consequential Amendments) (Scotland) Order 2003 be approved.
I thank the minister and his officials for coming along and thank the minister for giving the committee his mini-announcement here at our meeting in the chamber.
Horticultural Produce<br />(Community Grading Rules) (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/502)<br />Inshore Fishing<br />(Prohibition of Fishing and Fishing Methods) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Order 2003 (SSI 2003/514)
Under agenda item 2, we have two statutory instruments before us to be considered under the negative procedure: the Horticultural Produce (Community Grading Rules) (Scotland) Regulations 2003 and the Inshore Fishing (Prohibition of Fishing and Fishing Methods) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Order 2003. The Subordinate Legislation Committee has already considered both and confirmed that it has nothing to report to us. Do members have any comments?
I wonder whether any Highland members bothered to plot the co-ordinates in the order to make sure that they were richt.
I commend you for having read the subordinate legislation in detail.
The typographical error in the original amendment order is a bit unfortunate, but the people who are most affected by the measures—the fishermen in my constituency—certainly welcome SSI 2003/514. It dovetails nicely with all the efforts in other fisheries throughout the industry, such as the scallop—if I dare mention scallops—and lobster fisheries. The good thing about those efforts is that many of the initiatives are industry led. It is good to find in parts of Scotland progressive fishermen who are taking the initiative and insisting that the Government respond and put the conservation measures in place.
Are members content with the instruments and happy to make no recommendation to Parliament?
Members indicated agreement.