Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Official Report 554KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Additional Support Needs Tribunals for Scotland (Practice and Procedure) Amendment (No 2) Rules 2010 (SSI 2010/274)

---

Additional Support for Learning (Co-ordinated Support Plan and Dispute Resolution) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/275)

---

Additional Support for Learning (Appropriate Agencies and Sources of Information) (Scotland) Amendment of Commencement Dates Order 2010 (SSI 2010/276)

---

Education (Treatment of Student Loans on Sequestration) (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/300)

The second item on the agenda is consideration of four negative Scottish statutory instruments. The first three instruments revise the coming into force dates for five instruments relating to additional support for learning that were considered by the committee on 12 May 2010. The Subordinate Legislation Committee has drawn them to the Parliament’s attention as they breach the rule under standing orders holding that instruments cannot come into force until 21 days have passed since their lodging. However, the Subordinate Legislation Committee found the Scottish Government’s reasons for the breach to be satisfactory and had no other comments to draw to our attention. The Scottish Government’s letter to the Presiding Officer explaining the deviation from good practice has also been included for our consideration. The fourth instrument makes provision for student loans and bankruptcy.

I invite members’ comments on any of the instruments.

Presiding Officer—I mean, chair. Or convener. I have given you a promotion.

When I learned that the implementation dates of the instruments were to be changed, I was—to put it mildly—curious. I am not a cynic—

You are.

No, I am not, but I have to say that I am slightly cynical about why this is happening.

I can understand why local authorities might want to defer implementation, but I am still slightly worried. The parental representatives on the implementation group appear to agree with the move, but I am not clear whether they were excited about the idea or whether they felt that, as part of the group, they should agree. I wonder whether the committee could ask the minister who is on the implementation group—particularly who the parental representatives are—and whether it is still working. I am pretty sure that most of the parents in my area are not happy about the delay in implementation, even though it is only a matter of months. After all, there is quite a difference between introducing measures at the start of the school term and introducing them during the school term, because most parents exercise their rights at the start of the year and do not want to disrupt their child’s education halfway through. The delay makes a difference to their access to the modest new rights that are included in the instruments.

As the minister is not here, is the committee content to write to Mr Ingram seeking clarification on the membership of the implementation group and whether it continues to meet?

Members indicated agreement.

As members have no other comments, we move to formal consideration of the instruments. Does the committee agree that it has no recommendation to make on SSI 2010/274, SSI 2010/275, SSI 2010/276 and SSI 2010/300?

Members indicated agreement.

I suspend the meeting for a short comfort break and to allow our officials to advise the minister and his officials that he should come to committee for our next agenda item.

11:12 Meeting suspended.

11:24 On resuming—