European Strategy and Minor Rule Changes
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-03052, in the name of Dave Thompson, on the European strategy and other minor rule changes. I call Dave Thompson to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee.
09:31
The changes to the standing orders that are proposed by the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s report support the operation of the European strategy that has been developed by the European and External Relations Committee. The proposed changes put in place a mechanism for the Parliament to communicate its views to the United Kingdom Parliament on European legislative proposals in areas of devolved interest. That gives the Parliament an opportunity to contribute to UK Parliament consideration of whether a proposal complies with the principle of subsidiarity. When the UK Parliament considers that a proposal does not comply with that principle, it may, within eight weeks of the proposal being transmitted to it, submit to the European institutions a reasoned opinion setting out why the proposal does not comply. Under the strategy, the Scottish Parliament would be required to transmit its own views to Westminster before that deadline was reached.
To that end, a legislative proposal that has been identified within the Parliament as raising subsidiarity concerns will be referred to and considered by a lead committee. If the proposal falls within the remit of more than one committee, the bureau can designate a lead committee. If the committee agrees that the proposal raises subsidiarity concerns, it will be required to report to the Parliament and a motion to reflect the committee’s conclusion will be lodged by the convener for debate. The rules provide for the bureau to allocate such time for the debate as it considers appropriate. If the motion is agreed to, the opinion of the Parliament will be transmitted to the European committees at Westminster. However, it is recognised that the eight-week deadline for Westminster may mean that there is not sufficient time to complete the full procedure that I have just set out. In such cases, the draft rules allow for the lead committee’s concerns to be notified to the Westminster committees. Similarly, provision is made for notification on behalf of the committee to be provided if the Scottish Parliament is in recess for more than four days.
A rule change to require each subject committee and the Equal Opportunities Committee to appoint a European reporter is also included. A reporter would promote the European Union dimensions to a committee’s work and lead on early engagement on any issues emerging from Europe.
The Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee intends to review the operation of the rules once relevant committees have had an opportunity to put them into practice. To ensure that the standing orders remain up to date, we are also replacing the now defunct term “European Communities” with “European Union”.
I turn to the minor standing order rule changes. The first change is a proposal to remove the requirement to consider statutory instruments that, although laid before the Parliament, are not subject to any form of parliamentary control. That was a consequence of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 and meant that lead committees had to consider instruments that they would not have had to consider prior to the implementation of the 2010 act. The change that is recommended by the committee removes that requirement while still enabling a subject committee to consider an instrument if it wishes to do so.
The second change is to alter the reporting deadline for the Subordinate Legislation Committee in relation to instruments that have a period of parliamentary consideration that is longer than the usual 40 days. On a previous occasion when an instrument with a longer consideration period had been laid, the Parliament decided to suspend rule 10.3.2 in relation to it. So that the Parliament does not have to suspend standing orders in that way in future, the committee proposes a rule change to require the SLC to report within a longer timeframe, subject to the consideration period that applies to the particular instrument.
The third change to standing orders is to remove the requirement for legislative consent memorandums to be printed when they are first published, given that they will in any case be printed as part of the lead committee’s report. By amending standing orders so that LCMs require only to be published, rather than printed and published, the Parliament will have flexibility in deciding whether it is necessary to print LCMs in addition to publishing them on the Parliament’s website.
Fourthly, rule 1.8.3 requires that members are consulted on the terms of a proposed resolution or determination to be made under the Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Act 2006. Recent practical use of the rule highlighted that members essentially have to be consulted twice on the same thing. The proposed amendment will ensure that members will be consulted on the substantive content of any resolution or determination, but will not then have to be consulted again on the specific terms of the motion to agree that resolution or determination.
Finally, there are a number of references in standing orders to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. That body was replaced by the United Kingdom Supreme Court under schedule 9 to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, so the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee proposes an amendment to update those references.
On behalf of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, I move,
That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s 1st Report 2011 (Session 4), Minor Standing Orders Rule Changes (SP Paper 25) and 1st Report 2012 (Session 4), European Strategy (SP Paper 59), and agrees that changes to Standing Orders set out in Annexe A of the 1st Report 2011, other than those agreed to by motion S4M-01347, and in the annexe to this motion be made with effect from 20 August 2012.
09:37
As a member of the European and External Relations Committee, I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s motion to amend standing orders in order better to permit the Parliament to protect Scotland’s interests in the legislative procedures of the European Union.
As is well known, the policy reach of EU legislation is extensive, and it continues to extend. Many of the EU’s directives and regulations impact either directly or indirectly on a wide range of policy issues that fall within the competence of this Parliament. It is therefore essential that we, as a Parliament, avail ourselves of every opportunity to scrutinise and, where appropriate, influence EU legislative proposals that affect Scotland’s strategic interests and impact on our legislative authority. The motion seeks to modify our standing orders to achieve that result. The context for the modification is the Parliament’s European strategy, which was agreed to in December 2010 and which sets out a new approach for early engagement and scrutiny of EU policy initiatives and legislative proposals by the Parliament and its committees.
It is difficult to overstate the importance of early engagement and how it can make a real difference. For example, last Friday, the European and External Relations Committee brought together in this Parliament the Scottish Government, the UK Government, the European Commission, the European Parliament and key stakeholders from across Scotland’s university, research and business sectors to discuss Scotland’s response to the Commission’s proposed EU horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation. That afforded us the opportunity to contribute to the on-going debate in Brussels on the future of research funding across Europe. Early engagement by the Parliament is important to ensure that Scotland is able to take full advantage of the opportunities.
The key triggers for reconsidering the way in which the Parliament handles EU business are the new provisions introduced by the 2009 Lisbon treaty that require the European Commission to strengthen the role that the principle of subsidiarity plays in determining the reach of EU law. The strengthened subsidiarity protocol is therefore important as a device to restrict the unnecessary acquisition of legislative competences at the EU level and to stem the flow of unjustified legislation from Brussels.
I have made the point in the chamber before, and I make no apologies for repeating it today, that when the EU legislates in a particular area, it is not the powers of Governments that are reduced but the legislative powers of Parliaments, including this Parliament. For that reason, we must ensure that our parliamentary procedures for handling EU business are revised to allow our views on prospective EU legislation to be properly taken into account first by the Westminster Parliament and then in Brussels by both the Commission and our members of the European Parliament.
Although the motion sets out the formal changes that are needed to allow us to play our part in subsidiarity procedure, I am delighted that many of the wider recommendations that were made in the European and External Relations Committee’s report of 2010 are being taken forward. For example, the establishment of the position of European reporter in each of our parliamentary committees has greatly improved the capacity of each committee to ensure that, collectively, the Parliament is aware of the impact of EU legislative proposals on specific subject areas suitably early.
The amendments to the standing orders will help to strengthen the Parliament’s European engagement. Key negotiations are under way in Brussels on the EU budget, reforms to the common agricultural policy and common fisheries policy, state aid, financial services reform, EU structural funds and horizon 2020, and it is vital that the Parliament’s voice is heard in those discussions. That requires a more proactive approach from the Parliament.