Chamber and committees

The consultation exercise onproposed legislation to provide improved powers for the enforcement of RegulatingOrders began on 18 January 2006 and ended on 15 February 2006. Subsequently, those organisations which indicated to the Executive thatthey would have found it difficult to respond within the consultation period weregiven a further two weeks (until 1 March) to submit their responses.

One Regulating Order was inplace as at 31 December 2005, the grantee being the Shetland Shellfish ManagementOrganisation. The Scottish Executive holds no record of enforcement actiontaken under this Order.

In the 2004 Spending Reviewthe gross operating budget for the agency was increased by £2.195 million (to£19.499 million) and £4.318 million (to £21.622 million) in 2006-07 and 2007-08respectively. The 2006-07 Budget approved by the Parliament for gross agencyoperating costs is increased by a further £1.641 million, to £21.140 million. Theseincreases reflect the need to meet the cost of additional Regulating Orders andother inshore regulation enforcement burdens. In manpower terms this willinvolve employing an additional 36 staff for shore based enforcement andcrewing of an additional inshore fisheries protection vessel. The strategy willbe kept under review as policy on inshore fisheries develops, including if anyfurther Regulating Order proposals come forward.

In the wake of significant uplift in the quotas for North sea and West Coast nephrops, the Executive, in discussion with other UK fisheries administrations, is considering whether there is a case to look at a methodology other than the normal fixed quota allocation basis for distribution of the increased quotas. A decision will be made shortly, but any change would be the subject of full consultation and is unlikely to affect the interests of different sectors significantly.

In the wake of significant uplift in the quotas for North Sea and West Coast nephrops, the Executive, in discussion with other UK fisheries administrations, is considering whether there is a case to look at a methodology other than the normal fixed quota allocation basis for distribution of the increased quotas. There are a number of complex issues arising which require detailed consideration. We appreciate the need for an early decision and an announcement will be made shortly.

All officers in the Scottish Fingerprint Service (SFS) carry out their work in line with international standards. They all agree that fingerprint evidence is expert opinion of identification based on the scientific fact that fingerprints are unique to every individual and that an identification is made when the expert is personally satisfied that the order, relationship and unique properties of the features in any two prints are in agreement with no features in disagreement which cannot be explained. Once a match has been made it must be verified by two other fingerprint officers.

The processes are subject to internal quality assurance and to external independent audit under ISO 9001:2000 to which the SFS is accredited.

Since the Scotland Act came into force on 1 July 1999 all legislation enacted by the Scottish Parliament has required to comply with the convention rights as defined in the Human Rights Act 1998, and members of the Scottish Executive have had no power to make subordinate legislation or do any other act that would be incompatible with the convention rights. The convention rights are therefore taken into account in the preparation of all primary and secondary legislation within devolved competence. The Scottish Executive does not possess a comprehensive list of all legislative provisions applicable to Scotland that have been enacted specifically as a consequence of incorporation of the convention into Scots law, and such a list could only be produced at disproportionate cost.

The European Court of Human Rights maintains a database of cases that have been taken to it for consideration,which is available on the internet at:http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en.

A search of that database asat 2 November 2005 identified 38 cases where Scotland wasmentioned in the judgement. Other cases brought against the United Kingdom but notspecifically involving Scotland may nonetheless have had an impact in Scotland asinvolving aspects of United Kingdom law that are applicable in Scotland. The ScottishExecutive does not have a single analysis of the impact on Scots law of all thesecases and such an analysis could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

No. In respect of the First Minister’s attendance at the Committee of the Regions (CoR) plenary on 13 October, the CoR makes minutes of its meetings available on its Transfer of Administrative Documents (TOAD) website, a link to which can be found on the Scottish Executive website at www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/International-Relations/Europe/Menu17.

None.