Hansard

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

16 Apr 2002

Instruments Subject<br />to Annulment

We should say that we are not happy with the breaches of the 21-day rule in this and other instruments. There might be reasons for individual instruments making such a breach. However, when we stand back and look at the matter, we can see that breaches of the 21-day rule shoul...

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

14 May 2002

Instruments Subject <br />to Annulment

The enabling power for the regulations does not specify who is to make the regulations to which that power refers. We may want to consider asking the Executive whether it has anything to add to its previous observations on that point, as such issues have already arisen on othe...

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

10 Dec 2002

Draft Instruments Subject <br />to Approval

The second item on the agenda is draft instruments subject to approval. Looking at the rest of the agenda, I am delighted to say that we will find that the quality of drafting has suddenly improved hugely, perhaps as a result of our comments last week, and we can go through th...

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Chamber

20 Sep 2001

Schools (Assessment)

The Liberal Democrats are happy to support the motion and, indeed, to support Michael Russell's amendment, which makes an important point about the need to ensure that assessment must not become an end in itself and must not be allowed to get in the way of real teaching and le...

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Chamber

14 Nov 2002

National Cultural Strategy

I welcome the publication of the cultural strategy. The document provides a kaleidoscopic overview of what has been done, actions that are in progress and those that will be implemented in the future to develop the strands and themes that were outlined in the original cultural...

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

20 Mar 2001

Foot-and-Mouth Disease (Scotland) Declaratory (Amendment) (No 3) Order 2001 (SSI 2001/91)

We now come to instruments not laid before the Parliament and not subject to parliamentary procedure. The declaratory orders amend declaratory orders that came before the committee last week. As they are technically not statutory instruments, we do not need to discuss them.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

19 Mar 2002

Instruments Subject to Annulment

This is another example of an instrument—we occasionally refer to such instruments—that uses terms that are embedded in English law and statute, but which will be used in Scottish regulations. That is a stylistic point that we like to flag up occasionally.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

08 Oct 2002

Instruments Subject <br />to Annulment

Item 3 on the agenda is instruments subject to annulment.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

08 Oct 2002

Instruments Not Laid Before <br />the Parliament

Item 4 is instruments that are not laid before Parliament.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

10 Dec 2002

Instruments Subject <br />to Annulment

No points arise on the instruments.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

10 Dec 2002

Instruments not laid <br />before the Parliament

Okay. No points arise on the order. I am glad to say that that brings us to the end of the meeting. Thank you for your attendance. I also thank the legal adviser for going through the instruments with a fine-toothed comb and the drafters for not giving us any problems.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

18 Feb 2003

Draft Instruments Subject to Approval

Acts and instruments of the Scottish Parliament must be distinguished from their UK equivalents.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

25 Feb 2003

Executive Responses

I am sorry—that is right. If the change is not made in this instrument, there is a question whether the subsequent instruments are statutory instruments. We need to make that clear in some way. I realise that the issue is very technical; however, we are worried that allowing t...

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

11 Mar 2003

Timing of Secondary Legislation

Back in the real world, we move on to consider a letter to the Minister for Parliamentary Business, Patricia Ferguson, from our beloved and much-missed convener, which draws attention to the proliferation of instruments ahead of dissolution. The build-up has caused difficultie...

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Committee

09 Nov 1999

Evidence

I totally agree with that, and I am pleased to hear that Rhona Brankin will work with Sam Galbraith and Peter Peacock on that. Music gives lifelong advantages; I did maths and have forgotten it all, but what people learn about music lives with them for all time. If children le...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

22 Jan 2002

Subordinate Legislation

I was going to say that when the Subordinate Legislation Committee has been faced with pieces of subordinate legislation that we think might be problematic, we have passed them to the lead committee with a note that draws its attention to the defective drafting—which has somet...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

22 Jan 2002

Subordinate Legislation

With many of the instruments that come before the Subordinate Legislation Committee, opinions are divided on the issue of vires. Although sometimes members of the committee and its legal advisers believe that there is doubt about an instrument, we are assured by the Executive ...

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Committee

29 Jan 2002

Subordinate Legislation

If we proceed and do not annul the instruments today, I ask the civil servants to recognise and examine the remaining vires issues.

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Committee

14 Sep 1999

Food (Animals and Animal Products from Belgium) (Emergency Control)<br />(No 2) (Scotland) Order 1999<br />(SSI 1999/32)<br />Animal Feedingstuffs from Belgium (Control) (No 2) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 (SSI 1999/33)

I suggest that we bring the instruments to the attention of the Parliament and of the lead committee. We should say that we are not happy with the situation and that they should look at it.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Jul 2000

Suckler Cow Premium Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2000<br />(SSI 2000/215)

That is not as bad as having 19 amendments, as happened with one of the instruments that we considered earlier.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

06 Mar 2001

Less Favoured Area Support Scheme (Scotland) Regulations 2001<br />(SSI 2001/50)

The instruments in question are important. We do not want to appear to be frivolous about them in any way.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

06 Mar 2001

Foot-and-Mouth Disease Declaratory (Controlled Area) (Scotland) Order 2001 (SSI 2001/49)

There is a technicality. The order seems to be an administrative order. Could we ask the Executive for an explanation of its authority for making the instrument in the form of a statutory instrument? I refer to section 1 of the Statutory Instruments Act 1946.

The Deputy Convener (Ian Jenkins): LD Committee

20 Mar 2001

Scottish Parliament<br />Subordinate Legislation Committee<br />Tuesday 20 March 2001<br />(Morning)

Welcome to the 10th meeting of the Subordinate Legislation Committee. I have apologies from Kenny MacAskill, David Mundell and Gordon Jackson.The committee has received helpful responses to all four of the instruments on which it questioned the Executive.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

20 Mar 2001

Civil Legal Aid (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2001 (SSI 2001/82) <br />Gaming Act (Variation of Fees) (Scotland) Order 2001 (SSI 2001/83)

No points arise on the instruments.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

20 Mar 2001

Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2001 (SSI 2001/99)

The issue has less to do with timing and more with the relationship between the Scottish ministers and ministers of the Crown, and the way in which that relationship works, as laid down in the Scotland Act 1998. The question is whether it is proper for the Scottish ministers t...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

27 Mar 2001

Domestic Water and Sewerage Charges (Reduction) (Scotland) Regulations 2001 (SSI 2001/114)

It is not really worth getting into a debate over this particular matter, but Margo MacDonald is quite correct to say that some instruments should stick to the 21-day rule.

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

03 Apr 2001

Feeding Stuffs (Sampling and Analysis) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2001 (SSI 2001/104)

We asked the Executive about the late implementation of European Community obligations in relation to the instrument. The committee is particularly concerned about how the Scotland Act 1998 interacts with European Community law. We should draw the attention of the lead committ...

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

03 Apr 2001

Sea Fishing (Enforcement of Community Quota and Third Country Fishing Measures) (Scotland) Order 2001 (SSI 2001/117)

We move on to instruments subject to the negative procedure. The order is routine. Such orders are made annually to take account of decisions of the European Community's fisheries council. We have noticed one or two typos. Given the shortage of time, it would be reasonable to ...

The Deputy Convener: LD Committee

03 Apr 2001

National Health Service (General Medical Services) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2001<br />(SSI 2001/119)

We would be happy to do that. We take the position that timetabling should be organised to allow us to consider instruments and make points to which the Executive can respond in time, without calling civil servants for questioning. As no points arose on the regulations or the ...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

25 Sep 2001

Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning) (West Coast) (No 6) (Scotland) Order 2001 (SSI 2001/316)<br />Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning) (East Coast) (Scotland) Order 2001 (SSI 2001/317)

Which instruments are you talking about, convener?

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

02 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

There are two points. First, a reference to section 2(4) of the parent act is missing from the preamble. We wonder why that should be the case. It is just a minor point, but it is one that we should ask about. Secondly, we have talked previously about consolidation. This is th...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

02 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

The Executive will become big headed.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

02 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

I suspect that there is probably no sensible alternative, but the question is worth asking. We have asked before.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

The breach of the 21-day rule is clearly a precautionary measure and as such it is only reasonable. A more serious problem is whether the order has been cleared by the Commission. We should therefore ask the Executive whether that has been done.A wee drafting matter is the foo...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

I do not know whether other members have looked up all the references, but we have been assured that the matter is very complicated and therefore not terribly helpful. That should be avoided.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

I think that the issue might be the other way round, convener. The question is for which regulations section 2(2) of the 1972 act provides the vires. The point is a bit technical.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

It is a load of mince. Laughter.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

There appears to be a wrong footnote on page 1 of the regulations and the references to paragraphs (2) and (3) in new regulation 5A(3) do not seem to be right.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Not Laid Before the Parliament

You have to read out the titles of all those orders, convener. Laughter.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

23 Oct 2001

Instruments Not Laid Before the Parliament

No points arise on the orders themselves.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

30 Oct 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

I have a nice stylistic point. The regulations state that premises prepare food, but that is not normally the case; people in the premises prepare it and the food is prepared in the premises.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

13 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

I want to ask about the articles dealing with the vesting date. Articles 4(1)(b) and 4(2)(b) both mention a vesting date, but the term "vesting date" is not defined. The vesting date might be 1 December 2001, but it is not defined as such and it should be absolutely clear. The...

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

13 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

What about the phrase"non-recurrent grant under any earlier regulations"?

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

13 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

I am quite happy that they should go through.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

13 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

That is good news.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

13 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

No points arise on the instrument.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

27 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

We would like clarification of whether the Executive thinks that there is a difference between the terms and of what that difference is. If there is no difference, the Executive could use one word or the other.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

27 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

Margaret Thatcher was a chemist, but is she a woman?

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

27 Nov 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

Is that because the bill is not an Executive bill? We will not have the background notes before us.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

The instrument has been replaced, so we do not need to consider it further.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

Regulations such as these do the ordinary person's head in.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

The matter is confusing to the ordinary person, but the details are no doubt needed. Our legal advisers spotted one or two errors that had better be corrected. We could ask the Executive to explain the reference in regulation 2(3)(c), about which I will not go into detail.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

We could also ask why the directives in schedule 1 are not listed in a tabular form.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

Your figures are wrong.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

At the Liberal Democrat bazaar on Saturday, I was sold a lot of Jerusalem artichokes on the basis that they would cure my diabetes.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

They were forced upon me.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

04 Dec 2001

Instruments Subject to Annulment

Further to that, there is also the question about the derivation of regulation 3B of the Suckler Cow Premium (Scotland) Regulations 1993, as it does not appear to be SI 1194/1528 as stated in the footnote to the regulations.

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Committee

18 Dec 2001

Instruments Not Subject to Parliamentary Control

I just want to wish everyone a happy Christmas.

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): LD Committee

08 Jan 2002

Instruments Subject<br />to Annulment

It is.

Ian Jenkins: LD Committee

08 Jan 2002

Instruments Subject<br />to Annulment

There is a wee point to make regarding the use of the phrase "personal representatives", because the Scottish tradition would be to use the word "executor". However, we cannot make much of the matter, as the use of "personal representatives" has been established by precedent.