Meeting of the Parliament 05 October 2022
It has been a long afternoon and a longer evening, so I will try to be brief at the same time as making sure that Mr Cole-Hamilton’s concerns are addressed. I fear that I might fail in both aims, but I will try.
As all members are aware, the Scotland Act 1998—the UK act that provides for the current devolution settlement—has required the Scottish Parliament and Government, since 1999, to seek Crown consent if the same bill would need such consent were it passed in the UK Parliament. As required by the 1998 act, the Scottish Parliament’s standing orders set out the rules for determining that for each bill. Crown consent is required where a Scottish bill impacts the private property or interests of the sovereign. Where that requirement is identified, the Scottish Government is required to obtain that consent. That is not a choice that the Scottish Government is taking. Because the bill contains provisions that affect private residential tenancies—which could affect residential tenancies on His Majesty’s private estates and those on land that forms part of the Scottish Crown estate—Crown consent is required.
In order for the necessary consent to be provided, a copy of the bill has been shared with the palace. As is required by standing orders, the King’s consent to the bill is expected to be signified to Parliament ahead of the bill being debated at stage 3. That process has not changed, and it has been followed by each Scottish Government since 1999, including previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Governments. However, to make matters more transparent, Parliament was made aware on Monday that the Scottish Government will, from now on, make clear in bills’ accompanying documents how provisions in the bill apply to the Crown and why Crown consent is required.
We are the first Scottish Government to make that additional information available to Parliament on a bill’s introduction. That will ensure that members have full information on the introduction of a bill, to enable them to scrutinise and debate that throughout the passage of the bill. It has always been open to members and committees to raise questions as to whether or why Crown consent is required during any bill’s passage through parliament. That has not changed.
Members will also be aware that it remains Scottish Government policy that legislation should apply to the Crown in the same way as it does to anyone else. I confirm that this bill applies to the Crown in the same way as it applies to anyone else.
Amendment 101 seeks to require the Government, after the bill has been passed, to report on various discussions that have been held. Before they are published, bills might change for all sorts of reasons, on the basis of different discussions with stakeholders. It is difficult to see the purpose that is served by requiring the Government, after the bill has been passed, to provide a report on those matters in relation to the King.
The question for the Parliament on this bill and future bills is whether it is content with the way in which the bill applies to the Crown. In this case, it is about whether the Parliament is content that the bill applies to the Crown in the same way as it does to anyone else. For those reasons, I cannot support amendment 101 and I urge the member not to press it to a vote.