Official Report 210KB pdf
Provision of School Lunches (Disapplication of the Requirement to Charge) (Scotland) Order 2007 (Draft)
Item 2 is subordinate legislation. The draft order is accompanied by a cover note, which has been prepared by the clerks, and a briefing paper from the Scottish Parliament information centre. Adam Ingram will move the motion on the order, and members will have an opportunity to take part in a debate on it, at our next meeting, on 26 September.
I defer to my colleague from the legal department.
School lunches are provided for under section 53 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 and councils must act under that section whenever they provide school lunches. Section 53 specifies that school lunches must be charged for except in the case of children who are eligible for free school lunches, which is always linked to the receipt of benefit or a tax allowance under section 53 or regulations made under it. That provision was an obstacle in the way of councils running free school meals pilot schemes. This order under section 57 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 disapplies section 53 of the 1980 act for a temporary period for the five councils that are involved in the pilot, so that they may properly and legally run the pilot schemes.
Did you consider any alternative mechanisms?
We looked at section 53 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 to see whether it contained an appropriate power. However, that section refers clearly to children whose parents are in receipt of benefit or other tax allowances; it does not provide for a wider group of children, such as all children in primaries 1 to 3 in certain council areas. We came to the view that the appropriate vires did not exist in section 53 and that disapplying it, through an order under section 57 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003, was the way to go.
What would be the financial implication if the order applied to all councils in Scotland?
That goes back to the question on increasing entitlement to all children in primaries 1 to 3 that we answered earlier. The cost would be over six months, as distinct from over a year. It would cost £15 million to £23 million.
If Parliament considered the timeframe of the pilot to be too short, what would be the implications of the order ceasing to take effect on 30 June 2009, rather than 30 June next year?
Do you mean the financial implications?
I know that research has been commissioned to assess the pilot. What would the financial implications be?
Are you asking what the financial implications would be if the pilot in the five areas was extended to 2009?
Yes.
There would obviously be implications for providing funding for the school meals to each authority. There would also be implications for the on-going research; we would have to either retender to extend the research or extend the existing contract.
The cost would be roughly £9.2 million. The £4.6 million cost for the five authorities for six months would double if the pilot ran for a year.
Do the officials want to make any additional points? The minister will appear before the committee next week.
I do not think so. We answered the policy questions earlier this morning. This is an opportunity for the committee to ask our legal expert about the section 57 order.
Mr Purvis has a final question, which I hope relates to the legal aspects of the order, rather than the policy aspects.
It does. There would be no scope in the order to extend eligibility for free meals beyond pupils in primaries 1 to 3 in the council areas that have been selected.
The power to change free school meal provision entitlement in relation to benefits and tax allowance exists in section 53 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980. The negative procedure would be used for making any regulation under that section. This order comes under the affirmative procedure, so it needs the consent of Parliament. As with all statutory instruments, Parliament cannot amend the order; it can either accept or reject it in its entirety. The order does not make any provision for extending entitlement in relation to benefits or tax allowance, because the power to do so exists elsewhere. The order comes under the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 and removes an obstacle from councils, to allow them to use their general power to advance well-being to do things for the benefit of people in their area.
So, the disapplication of section 53 of the 1980 act is the general scope of the order. There would have to be a second instrument to extend eligibility to different categories of pupils.
If it was ever intended to change who is eligible for free school meals across the board, there would need to be a set of regulations under section 53 of the 1980 act. Subsequent orders could be made under section 57 of the 2003 act to disapply the obstacle in relation to different councils or nationally, under this power.
Subsequent orders "under this power"?
Yes. There is a general power under the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 to amend or disapply any legislation that prevents a council from using its power to advance well-being.
So after the order before us is passed, subsequent legislation would be needed to disapply the provisions for certain categories of pupils.
Yes, if it was decided that that was the policy.
But that would be the process.
Yes.
That concludes our questions to you this morning. Thank you very much for your attendance at the meeting and for returning for item 2.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
Previous
Free School MealsNext
Petitions