Official Report 81KB pdf
I welcome members to the 33rd meeting in 2008 of the Subordinate Legislation Committee. We have received apologies from our convener, Jamie Stone, which is why I am convening the meeting, and from Tom McCabe. I welcome Ross Finnie as the substitute for Jamie Stone. I remind members to turn off any mobile phones and so on.
On section 2(1), "Directions and guidance", are members content to recommend that the Scottish Government should give further consideration to amending the bill to apply the general duty in section 1 to reduce overall flood risk to the exercise of this power, and to provide that the direction-making power can be exercised only after consulting SEPA and/or any responsible authority about proposed directions in light of their impact upon the exercise of those bodies' functions?
Section 5(c) confers the power to designate responsible authorities. Are members content to recommend that the minister should consider amending the bill to provide that the power is subject to an obligation to consult appropriately before its exercise, particularly in light of the apparent intention to conduct extensive consultation with any body that it is proposed to be specified as a responsible authority?
Section 9(2) confers a duty on SEPA to prepare flood risk assessments. Are members content to reconsider the section at stage 2 to assess whether that direction-making power has been removed?
I intend to put the question on four delegated powers together, because the issues that arise from them are the same. The powers are in section 10(1)(a), "Flood risk assessments: review"; section 13(2), "SEPA to identify potentially vulnerable areas and local plan districts"; section 14, "Potentially vulnerable areas and local plan districts: review"; and sections 16(1) and 16(2), "SEPA to assess possible contribution of alteration etc of natural features".
On sections 18(4), 18(5) and 18(6), "Flood hazard maps", in light of the minister's response, are members content to recommend that the Scottish Government should give further consideration to amending the bill to introduce a requirement to consult SEPA, because the exercise of the powers will impose additional obligations upon and might have resource implications for SEPA?
On section 23(2), "SEPA to prepare flood risk management plans", in light of the potential impact upon the deadlines that are imposed in the bill, are members content to draw the Scottish Government's response to the attention of the lead committee, which might want to consider whether such a direction-making power should be subject to a consultation requirement?
Section 29(6) confers a power to make further provision in relation to local authorities preparing local flood risk management plans. Are members content to report that the committee considers that the power should be subject to a requirement to consult local authorities and other appropriate bodies, including SEPA and Scottish Water?
Are members content to report that the committee questions whether it is within the vires of the proposed delegated power to make provisions for the structure of such plans, and the procedural steps that must be taken during their preparation? The committee might also want to draw the matter to the attention of the lead committee, which might want to consider it further. Are members happy with those proposals?
On section 44(1), "Power to give effect to Community obligations etc", are members content to welcome the Scottish Government's agreement to amend the bill to provide that the power will be subject to affirmative rather than negative procedure? The committee might want to reconsider the power at stage 2 to ensure that the amendment has been made. Do members agree to those proposals?
Section 52(4) confers the power to amend the flood protection scheme- making process. Are members content to welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to amend the bill to provide that the exercise of the power is subject to a requirement to consult parties that will be directly affected by the exercise of the power, such as local authorities and agents of local authorities?
Are members content to recommend that the Scottish Government, in considering the amendment to the power, consider carefully whether consultation should also be done with other notifiable bodies, whose interests might be affected by any proposed change to the flood protection scheme-making process?
Section 77 inserts a new section 12ZA into the Reservoirs Act 1975, and confers the power to make provision for reporting reservoir safety incidents. Are members content that the power to be conferred by new section 12ZA(1) of the Reservoirs Act 1975 is acceptable in principle, and that it is subject to affirmative procedure?
In light of the Scottish Government's response, are members content that the power to be conferred by new section 12ZA(2)(d) of the Reservoirs Act 1975 upon SEPA and the Scottish ministers to issue guidance relating to incident reporting to undertakers, supervising engineers and other persons is acceptable in principle?
On section 82(1), "Ancillary provision", are members content to recommend that the Scottish Government should give further consideration to agreeing that any modification of primary legislation, however it is effected, be subject to affirmative procedure?
Paragraph 13 of schedule 2 confers the power to make provision about the consideration to be given to the likely environmental effects of proposed flood protection schemes. Are members content that the proposed power is acceptable in principle, and that it is subject to negative procedure?