Plenary, 14 Dec 2000

Meeting date: Thursday, December 14, 2000

Official Report 792KB pdf

---

Parliamentary Bureau Motions

We come now to Parliamentary Bureau motions. I hope that Mr Tavish Scott is listening.

Motions moved,

That the Parliament agrees that the following instruments be approved:

the draft Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2000;

the draft Education (National Priorities) (Scotland) Order 2000;

the Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning) (West Coast) (No 5) (Scotland) Order 2000 (SSI 2000/409);

the Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning) (West Coast) (No 6) (Scotland) Order 2000 (SSI 2000/428); and

the draft Advice and Assistance (Assistance by Way of Representation) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2001.

That the Parliament agrees the following designation of Lead Committee—

the Transport and the Environment Committee to consider the Financial Assistance for Environmental Purposes (Scotland) Order 2000 (SSI 2000/430)—[Tavish Scott.]

In line with standing orders, I wish to oppose the draft Advice and Assistance (Assistance by Way of Representation) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2001. I understand that I have three minutes to give reasons for my objection.

I do not think that you have three minutes, because I am bound to take decision time at 5 o'clock. However, you have what time is left.

I will be as brief as I can.

I oppose the regulations because they are premature. The way in which legal aid will be provided is exclusive rather than inclusive, because of means testing and the one-sided approach to the availability of legal aid for individuals. I think that there should be a wider review of the issue, but I recognise and accept that there are cross-border implications.

There are differences between employment tribunals in Scotland and those elsewhere. For example, the proceedings of such tribunals are not recorded in Scotland. Additional legal involvement would put the cart before the horse.

The make-up of employment tribunals is based on individual circumstances and takes account of practical involvement in the workplace. The tribunals comprise people with some experience. A legal mind chairs the tribunal, and is joined by someone from industry and a trade union representative.

The current balance of solicitor involvement runs at 21 per cent on each side of an argument. We do not need more solicitors to become involved in issues such as this—issues that can affect badly the interests of small businesses, among others.

I will give Mr Wallace 30 seconds to reply.

Obviously, I want the regulations to go through. They represent a significant extension of the provision of legal advice and assistance in Scotland. As a result of the affirmative orders, people who attend employment tribunals in which a case is arguable and in which it is reasonable that the legal aid board should grant assistance by way of representation—because a case is complex or the individual would have difficulty presenting it—will receive such assistance.

While that is a significant extension of the provision of legal advice in Scotland and helps us to become compliant with the provisions of the European convention on human rights, it is also worth doing in its own right.