Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid) 23 March 2021
Amendment 3, in my name, is necessary to clarify the effect of section 1(2A). It will extend subsection (2A) to require the charter articles to be read subject not only to any
“reservations, objections or interpretative declarations”,
but to any
“undertakings, notifications or denunciations”
by the UK as may be in force.
I am afraid that the Government cannot support amendments 1, 2, 4 and 5, in the name of Andy Wightman. I have a lot of sympathy with the policy intention behind the amendments, and particularly with Mr Wightman’s point about wanting Scotland to take decisions that impact on Scotland but, unfortunately, there are issues that prevent the Government from agreeing with his proposed approach.
For the bill to be accurately described as an incorporation bill, it requires to mirror the UK’s international obligations in relation to the charter. That includes any declarations, reservations, undertakings, denunciations, interpretative declarations and the like that are made by the UK under the charter articles and general international law, now and in the future.
The effect of Mr Wightman’s amendments is essentially to provide for a manual mechanism, as he said, for keeping pace with any changes that are made to the UK’s international obligations, instead of the automatic mechanism, as provided for under the current section 1(2A). In order to remain aligned with the charter as it applies to UK and international law, it would be necessary to operate that manual mechanism every time the UK made a declaration or any other change. The Scottish ministers are committed to upholding international law and could not deliberately decline to reflect the accurate international legal position in a bill such as this one.
Mr Wightman’s amendments would also mean that there could still be a potential disconnect between the charter as incorporated by the bill and the charter as it—