Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 5 November 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1001 contributions

|

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Minister for Parliamentary Business

Meeting date: 1 October 2024

Daniel Johnson

Thank you for unmuting me, convener. The minister will be relieved to hear that the committee requires me to ask my questions from a cupboard in an undisclosed location.

My first question relates to reports from the Scottish Law Commission, to which the minister referred in his opening remarks with regard to the introduction of the Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill. As he will be aware, the Government set out in the programme for government its intention to introduce a new leases (automatic continuation etc) (Scotland) bill. What is the timescale for the introduction of that bill? What was the basis for choosing to bring forward that bill from among those issues covered in the SLC’s reports?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Minister for Parliamentary Business

Meeting date: 1 October 2024

Daniel Johnson

I thank the minister for that answer; we have all the more reason to look forward to Christmas now.

Can the minister elaborate on the degree to which the proposed bill meets the criteria and objectives that are set out in the relevant Scottish Law Commission report?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

I will ask a very narrow question and then I have some questions that follow on from it. Presumably, the Government thinks that this will be a substantial and permanent change and one that will take land reform on a particular direction of travel. Would that be a fair thing to surmise?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

You set out the need for consultation and flexibility. Can you explain why primary legislation would frustrate that? The process might take longer, but fundamentally it would still enable you to make changes. You have said that there is a general obligation on the Government to consult, but the degree to which we have an open and transparent consultation process is enhanced by Parliament. Indeed, it is Parliament’s primary function. Why do you think that Parliament is not the right place for considering future changes or undertaking the consultation that might be required on such changes?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

I just ask you to acknowledge that, although many of the instruments would be introduced under the affirmative procedure, that is not the same as introducing primary legislation, primarily because it is less likely that evidence will be taken. More important, the ability for Parliament to amend is obviously not there at all. Do you acknowledge that that is a pretty big difference between primary legislation and the affirmative procedure?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

It is in our briefing notes. I am just noting that.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

We have identified three particular areas in relation to powers to change the fundamental concepts of the bill, but this theme probably extends to some other areas that colleagues have already mentioned. In particular, sections 1(4), 2(4) and 4(2) essentially give the Government powers to alter quite fundamental concepts, such as who would be in scope to exercise the right to buy and the requirements around consultation, which could impact the timelines and even who could exercise those powers.

Will you explain why it is necessary to leave such fundamental concepts open in the primary legislation and to leave those powers to secondary legislation?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

Given that, and given the wide flexibility—in your own words, it is flexible—is there not a risk that it almost lays open the possibility for the reverse to happen? Obviously, this is a democracy, and Administrations change. What if, hypothetically, the monopolist and large landowners party were to come to power in 10 years’ time? What would prevent it from using these provisions to bring about effects that were entirely contrary to the intent of the legislation as you have presented it?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

Obviously, though, they cannot amend.

In your previous answers, you said that, in some areas, you are just bringing powers into line with other bits of legislation. Other than for reasons of consistency with older pieces of legislation, can you set out the rationale for bringing those powers into line and tell us whether there has been any impact assessment or analysis of whether they were appropriate to begin with? After all, the previous legislation could have got the balance wrong.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 17 September 2024

Daniel Johnson

I have one final question. We are seeing a significant number of framework bills that have a broadly stated intention but in which the detail is largely left to secondary legislation. The rationale of co-design is often given.

It is absolutely right that the Government seeks to design legislation with as broad a range of stakeholders as possible—that makes sense. I have one simple question: why is it necessary to do that co-design following or in conjunction with legislation, rather than doing it beforehand and baking it into the legislation? In that way, the Parliament could consider the full suite and the finished article, rather than hope that the Government does the right kind of consultation and introduces the right kind of secondary legislation.