Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 22, 2022

Official Report 468KB pdf

---

Instruments subject to Affirmative Procedure

Under agenda item 3, we are considering five instruments, on which no points have been raised.

---

Forensic Medical Services (Self-Referral Evidence Retention Period) (Scotland) Regulations 2022 [Draft]

---

Forensic Medical Services (Modification of Functions of Healthcare Improvement Scotland and Supplementary Provision) Regulations 2022 [Draft]

---

Budget (Scotland) Act 2021 Amendment Regulations 2022 [Draft]

---

Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No 4) Regulations 2022 [Draft]

---

Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Directions by Local Authorities) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2022 [Draft]

Do members have any comments on any of the instruments?

I want to flag up the draft Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No 4) Regulations 2022 as an instrument of concern. If approved, it would come into effect on 27 February, which is a matter of days away. I am concerned about the expedited nature of the process. I accept that it is an affirmative instrument, so the Parliament will get a vote on it, but the measures in it are really quite fundamental. They include measures on the on-going wearing of face coverings and the use of vaccination passports. Certainly, the committee has taken considerable interest in the latter of those issues. Given that we are no longer in an emergency situation, it is hard to see the justification for gifting the powers to the Government any longer.

We are debating the use of delegated legislation this afternoon, so I do not want to rehearse the arguments on that. However, we do not have much time to scrutinise the instrument, and the lead committee has expressed reservations about the window of opportunity to examine the regulations and their extension. I cannot see the justification for the regulations or for using a delegated route to extend them, especially given that primary legislation is coming that will deal with the issues—we will discuss that in private later and the Parliament will debate it in future. On that basis, I am not content for us not to draw the attention of the Parliament to the instrument, and therefore I seek to have a vote on it.

You raise a number of points. Some of your concerns relate to policy issues and others relate to the route by which the instrument has been brought to the Parliament. Clearly, it would be for the relevant committee to put questions on the policy matters to the Deputy First Minister.

The regulations came up in the committee before we knocked off for the February recess. There were two options for the instrument to come to us. It could have come as a made affirmative instrument or through the expedited affirmative process. I agreed to the latter, so that there could be some dialogue with the committee and so that we could undertake our role better.

I am content with the instrument, given the opportunity that we have had to discuss it. The recommended action is that we do not draw it to the attention of the Parliament. If colleagues have any other comments to make, I am happy to hear them.

It is clear that there will be a division on whether we wish to make no recommendations in relation to the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No 4) Regulations 2022.

For

Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)

Against

Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)

The result of the division is: For 3, Against 2, Abstentions 0.

The committee is therefore agreed. However, the member’s concerns have been expressed and noted on the record.

Do members have comments on any of the other instruments?

In relation to the draft Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Directions by Local Authorities) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2022, and in light of the discussion that we had on the extension of the expiry date, might there be an opportunity for us to have further discussion and scrutiny of the instrument if we have the Deputy First Minister in next week?

We are going to contact the DFM, so we can highlight that particular instrument.

I appreciate that—thank you.

No problem.

As there are no other comments, and notwithstanding the vote that we just had and the points that Mr Hoy has just made, is the committee content with the instruments?

Members indicated agreement.