Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,354,908
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Showing 60 of 2,354,908 contributions. Latest 30 days: 0. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 25 Mar 2026.
Dr Jackson: Lab Chamber
27 Sep 2001
Police and Fire Services (Finance) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
As fire service pensions are not directly related to the bill, I will deal with the issue that remains largely outstanding: ministerial approval. The evidence provided by Chief Constable William Rae and his ACPOS colleagues crystallised what I regard as the main issue: more ef...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Committee Reports (Approval)
The last item on the agenda concerns the approval of committee reports and how we will proceed to ensure that we have the necessary reports ready, given the 20-day limit and the need to turn around quickly reports on bills that are amended at stage 2. I suggest that members de...
The Convener: Lab Committee
02 Sep 2003
Instruments Subject to Approval
Item 4 is instruments subject to approval. The numbering is out in our papers: this is confirmed as item 4 on the agenda, although it is marked "Item 5" on our briefing paper.
The Convener: Lab Committee
28 Oct 2003
Draft Instrument Subject <br />to Approval
The draft instrument subject to approval is the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Amendment (Scotland) Order 2003. No points arise on the order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Feb 2004
Draft Instruments Subject to Approval
Item 4 is draft instruments subject to approval. No points have been identified in relation to the regulations. Are there any further points?
The Convener: Lab Committee
25 May 2004
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
We move to item 5, which is consideration of draft instruments subject to approval. No points have been identified on either set of regulations. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
25 May 2004
Instrument Subject to Approval
We move to item 6, which is consideration of an instrument subject to approval. No points have been identified on the order. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
09 Nov 2004
Draft Instruments Subject to Approval
The original version of the first draft instrument subject to approval contained an error of form, so the Executive withdrew it and substituted it with a corrected version. No points have been identified on either draft instrument.
The Convener: Lab Committee
05 Sep 2005
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
Agenda item 2 is consideration of draft instruments subject to approval. No points arise on the draft order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
25 Oct 2005
Delegated Powers Scrutiny
Section 35 is entitled "Use of organ no longer required for procurator fiscal purposes". Section 35(2)(c) gives ministers the power to specify persons who may give approval to carry out research on an organ removed from a deceased person. While the Executive memorandum states ...
The Convener: Lab Committee
08 Nov 2005
Draft Instrument Subject <br />to Approval
Item 5 is a draft instrument subject to approval. No substantive points arise on the order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
08 Nov 2005
Instrument Subject to Approval
Item 6 is an instrument subject to approval. No substantive points arise on the order. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
22 Nov 2005
Draft Instrument Subject <br />to Approval
Agenda item 5 is a draft instrument subject to approval. The draft order adds new categories of houses to the list in section 83(6) of the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 and covers properties that are to be disregarded for the purposes of registration as a landlo...
The Convener: Lab Committee
22 Nov 2005
Instruments Subject to Approval
Agenda item 6 is instruments subject to approval. No points arise on the orders.
The Convener: Lab Committee
29 Nov 2005
Instrument Subject to Approval
Item 4 is consideration of instruments subject to approval. No points arise on this order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
13 Dec 2005
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
We move on to agenda item 4 and our first draft instrument subject to approval. Both Ken Macintosh and I have an interest in the draft order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
20 Dec 2005
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
Agenda item 5 is draft instruments subject to approval. No points arise on the first draft order, but members will note that it was withdrawn and has now been re-laid. We welcome the fact that our points were picked up.
The Convener: Lab Committee
09 May 2006
Delegated Powers Scrutiny
Yes. The lead committee could consider it. We could emphasise that it could consider whether there should be a restriction to adding to rather than removing the criteria.Section 8, "Maps and scheme of charges", will insert new section 41B into the 1993 act. We thought that the...
The Convener: Lab Committee
20 Jun 2006
Draft Instrument Subject <br />to Approval
Agenda item 3 is consideration of a draft instrument subject to approval. No points arise on the draft instrument, a note on which is contained in the additional legal brief.Members may wish to note that the Executive has corrected an error in the draft order that was identifi...
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
13 Jan 2004
Local Governance (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I am pursuing this issue only because it was discussed this morning by the Subordinate Legislation Committee. Legal advice to the committee indicated that"the Bill does provide for affirmative procedure to ensure that the substance of the rules will be subject to parliamentary...
Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab): Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
My point is similar to Tricia Marwick's, but I will build on it. How will the bill stop attacks by the media? I still do not understand why a group that disputes the appointment of a candidate cannot approach the media to prompt an attack. I see no way of preventing the media ...
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Under the present system, would the commissioner not be able to pick up the fact that the criteria had not been fulfilled?
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
So it is not the commissioner's role to check that the criteria have been met.
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Iain Smith has already asked many of the questions that I was going to put to you—he followed the line that I was going to go down—but I would like to raise a couple of other points. You said of the present system that you have already started to make changes, which sounds use...
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
No. Sorry, I was not clear. I mean the role of interviewing in selecting chairs, which—in Alex Neil's bill—would be done by the committee. I was thinking of what happens in the present procedure. How does that operate and how could it be improved? That would be an alternative ...
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Who was present at the interview of the last chair who was elected in Scotland?
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I meant the last chair who was elected to a public body.
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I just wanted to get an idea of what kind of expertise the other people on the panel would have in selecting that chair.
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
You said that Executive policy is going down this line—
Dr Jackson: Lab Committee
15 Jan 2002
Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Is it fair to say that the bill has done no harm in raising the profile of public appointments, which is what Dame Rennie Fritchie said is required? Do you agree that your proposals—if I interpret them correctly—are an attempt to continue the depoliticisation of the process an...
Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab): Lab Committee
29 Jan 2002
Items in Private
I want to suggest a compromise. As I have just raced here from Stirling, I have not seen the two reports either. However, I accept that we must deal with the draft stage 1 report on Alex Neil's Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill today. As it will be d...
The Convener: Lab Committee
17 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
The Executive has asked the committee to consider the order at today's meeting so that it can be debated by the Finance Committee, which is the lead committee, and then complete its parliamentary procedure.No points arise on the order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
17 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
There are no comments to make on the regulations.
The Convener: Lab Committee
17 Jun 2003
Instruments Subject to Approval
From the Subordinate Legislation Committee's previous work, I gather that a proposal has been made that we might consider different ways of treating orders similar to these three. We might consider how such orders might be made less demanding on a committee and the Parliament....
The Convener: Lab Committee
17 Jun 2003
Instruments Subject to Approval
Are we all agreed on that?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
17 Jun 2003
Instruments Subject to Approval
No points arise on the orders.
The Convener: Lab Committee
17 Jun 2003
Instruments Subject <br />to Annulment
It would be advisable for us to recommend approval of the order, but draw the drafting errors to the Executive's attention. I gather that minor drafting errors occur not only in this order. They crop up in other instruments. It is an issue that we might want to raise with the ...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
There are quite a few points to make on the regulations, on which we might wish to seek clarification from the Executive, so bear with me as I go through them. First, we might ask why the draft regulations appear to define a number of terms with reference to legislation that h...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
The fourth point is that the regulations exclude certain payments from named charitable trusts, such as the Macfarlane trusts, from computations of income and capital under the regulations. There is no specific mention of the Eileen trusts or of any of the new trusts that were...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
The next point concerns the fact that regulation 23(b) does not seem to fit in context. It seems in part to be a free-standing provision and some clarification of that would be welcome.The final point concerns regulation 28. In the definition of "refurbishment scheme", we thin...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
That is done as a matter of course.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
Are we agreed that we will make those points to the Executive?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
We might want to ask the Executive why, in items 1 and 2 of the schedule to the regulations, it was considered necessary to include definitions of the terms "improvement grant" and "repairs grant", when those definitions simply reproduce the definitions of the terms in section...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
Are there any points in relation to this order?
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
We will ask about the power of modification. We could also ask about the vires of the offence provisions in article 6(a), which is linked to that. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
No points arise on these instruments.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
We come to the regulations that Christine May mentioned earlier. Do you want to raise some points, Christine?
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
Are we agreed to raise the reason for the delay and the issue of the Executive's reassurance that the provisions of the regulations accurately reflect the requirements of the directive, particularly in relation to the stall and the tethers, which links to paragraphs 4 and 5 of...
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
I am pleased about that. That gives me hope.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
As long as the Official Report is able to reflect your comments, Gordon, we will ask the Executive for clarification on that matter.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
The main point is that, if I have picked up Gordon Jackson correctly, his suggestion could well be an improvement on the European directive.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval
We will ask the Executive about that matter.That brings us nicely to the end of agenda item 3, which will probably be our one bit of excitement for this morning.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Committee Reports (Approval)
We could either sub-delegate power to the clerk, or we could act through the deputy convener. Which would members prefer?
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Committee Reports (Approval)
You are hoping that I do not throw myself under a bus.
The Convener: Lab Committee
24 Jun 2003
Committee Reports (Approval)
That is how we worked in the Local Government Committee last session. That is how it should be, so there you have it, Gordon. Apart from Gordon Jackson, we are all new to the committee, so I thank members very much for being so patient during the first three meetings. I will s...
The Convener: Lab Committee
02 Sep 2003
Draft Instrument<br />Subject to Approval
Item 3 covers the draft Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 (Consequential Modification) Order 2003. No points arise on the draft order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
02 Sep 2003
Instruments Subject to Approval
I will not go through the full list of orders, but they start with the Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning) (Orkney) (No 2) (Scotland) Order 2003. That is SSI number 2003/321. The other instruments are numbers 365, 366, 369, 374, 380, 381, 392...
The Convener: Lab Committee
09 Sep 2003
Instrument Subject to Approval
No points arise on the order.
The Convener: Lab Committee
16 Sep 2003
Draft Instrument Subject <br />to Approval
There is only one recommendation in our legal brief, which is to ask the Executive"why, as the Regulations amend the parent Act itself, section 168(5) has not been cited in the preamble as an enabling power."Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
The Convener: Lab Committee
16 Sep 2003
Instruments Subject to Approval
No points have been identified in relation to the orders.Members indicated agreement.
← Back to list
Chamber

Plenary, 27 Sep 2001

27 Sep 2001 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Police and Fire Services (Finance) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
As fire service pensions are not directly related to the bill, I will deal with the issue that remains largely outstanding: ministerial approval. The evidence provided by Chief Constable William Rae and his ACPOS colleagues crystallised what I regard as the main issue: more effective financial planning—in other words, financial planning with the flexibility that is currently available to local authorities. As Chief Constable Rae said, the requirement for ministerial approval as well as constituent authority approval will

"not create the facility that the bill is intended to create of allowing us to break away from the annual budget cycle."—[Official Report, Local Government Committee, 4 September 2001; c 2146.]

The chief constable felt that the ministers currently have adequate controls to prevent large balances building up, including the proposed 3 per cent limit; the fact that ministers determine the total grant-aided expenditure levels for both the whole service and individual forces, against which the police-specific grant is paid; and the controls over capital allocations and any discretionary funds that are allocated. It was strongly argued that there is no possibility of the grant being used for non-police purposes and that balances cannot be held for the sake of it. ACPOS felt

"The proposal for Ministerial approval would introduce uncertainty and unnecessary bureaucracy to the financial planning process".

Chief Constable Andrew Cameron argued that a system of ministerial approval and constituent authority approval

"would hinder our confidence in following the principle of three-year budgetary planning",

although I accept that the issue of constituent authority approval has now been dealt with. Chief Constable Cameron also argued that local unit commanders needed to have increased confidence

"at inspector level to prioritise their local community needs."—[Official Report, Local Government Committee, 4 September 2001, c 2151.]

More devolved financial management would allow that to happen. Local needs could be prioritised and dealt with in an on-going and effective manner.

Other witnesses argued that sufficient structures are in place at police and fire board level to make ministerial approval unnecessary. Indeed, it was felt that a requirement for ministerial approval goes against the spirit of the bill, which is to give the police and fire services more freedom to manage their budgets flexibly and effectively. In response to my question about when ministerial approval would be required, Iain Gray implied that the system would be so informal as to be non-existent. If so, there seems no reason for requiring ministerial approval. Tricia Marwick made the same point earlier.

The sentiments that I have expressed wholly reflect the feeling of the Local Government Committee. There are still issues to discuss, but all members of the committee are agreed on the general principles of the bill and on the need to move forward with it.

In the same item of business

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel): NPA
The next item of business is the stage 1 debate on motion S1M-1992, in the name of Jim Wallace, on the general principles of the Police and Fire Services (Fi...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Iain Gray): Lab
I thank the Local Government Committee for its careful consideration of the Police and Fire Services (Finance) (Scotland) Bill and for its report, which prov...
Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): SNP
Am I right in saying that a 3 per cent limit also applies to the fire service, which has a different financial structure from the police service? There is pe...
Iain Gray: Lab
The limit on carry-forward carries with it an element of control. The reason for making similar proposals for the fire service and the police service is a ma...
Tricia Marwick (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP): SNP
I am sure that members wish to welcome to the chamber representatives of the police service in Fife. It is a nice coincidence that they are visiting today wh...
Mr Keith Harding (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): Con
I congratulate Tricia Marwick on speaking for a full seven minutes. She has said practically everything that I was going to say, so I will find it difficult ...
Mr Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD): LD
Mr Harding does not have to speak for five minutes.
Mr Harding: Con
Oh but I must, just to deprive Mr Rumbles of the time.The Conservatives, like the majority of the witnesses who gave evidence to the Local Government Committ...
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): LD
Mr Harding and I have both served on police boards in our time. Does he agree that the pension problem is potentially so big that it might not be best to tac...
Mr Harding: Con
There is no doubt that that is a possible solution. That is why I have asked the minister to consider the issue separately and open up the debate. As Tricia ...
Mr Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD): LD
The bill's primary purpose is to allow fire and police authorities to carry forward any underspends in their budgets to the following financial year. The mea...
Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab): Lab
The Local Government Committee's discussion of the Police and Fire Services (Finance) (Scotland) Bill was interesting and raised some important issues. Howev...
The Deputy Presiding Officer: SNP
Do not conduct conversations in between the speaker and the chair, please, Mr Gibson.
Dr Jackson: Lab
As fire service pensions are not directly related to the bill, I will deal with the issue that remains largely outstanding: ministerial approval. The evidenc...
Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP): SNP
Consensus is rife in the chamber today. That is always welcome during stage 1 consideration of a bill. Amendments can be made at stages 2 and 3.This bill con...
Mr Michael McMahon (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab): Lab
One of the Parliament's strengths can be found in the fact that we are able to find time to introduce short bills that tidy up some of the issues that seem t...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con): Con
When I heard the minister use the term "devious machination", I wondered what he was intending to bring into play. I was certainly disturbed from my afternoo...
Trish Godman (West Renfrewshire) (Lab): Lab
Today will not be the first time that the minister has accepted much of what is in a stage 1 report that has been produced by the Local Government Committee....
Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): SNP
As a consensus politician—which I clearly am—I found myself in a rising panic at the prospect of talking about the bill. Every speaker chipped away more and ...
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): LD
Consensus has a soporific quality, so I shall try to inject a little controversy into the debate to liven up proceedings. In the proper manner of winding up,...
Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): Con
On behalf of my party, I welcome the Police and Fire Services (Finance) (Scotland) Bill. Police and fire brigades are essential parts of community protection...
Tricia Marwick: SNP
I thank Trish Godman and the other members of the Local Government Committee, who have done far more work on the issue than I have—I have been a member of th...
The Deputy Minister for Finance and Local Government (Peter Peacock): Lab
Presiding Officer, the prospect of talking for 15 minutes on this subject daunts me, but I gather that you are going to suspend the meeting as soon as I sit ...
Mr Stone: LD
I will press the minister on one issue. He will recall that, when the Tory party conference went to Inverness, the local police board's budget went pear-shap...
Peter Peacock: Lab
On the general question of flexibility, the bill should help. The Deputy First Minister answered a question at last week's question time about the costs that...
Tricia Marwick: SNP
I refer back to ministerial control. If the minister is saying that that control is going to be informal, I am at a loss to understand why it must be enshrin...
Peter Peacock: Lab
The reason is the one that I have given the chamber. With an informal set of procedures, accumulated balances could build and build. We do not want that to h...