The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 1659 contributions
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
That brings me neatly on to my substantive questions. I want to look at the practical changes that we could bring into parliamentary procedure around framework legislation as a whole. As the panel has observed, it is better to think about the provisions in legislation and the powers that could be conferred on the executive, rather than trying to decide whether the legislation as a whole is over the line or not.
I was very interested in one proposal in the written submissions that we got, which was about having some sort of written agreement or guidance between the legislature and the executive. I think that both Dr Grez Hidalgo and Dr Fox had similar proposals in their submissions. Dr Fox described it as being a “Concordat on Legislative Delegation”. Will you explain what features that should have? Would that contain the principles that I alluded to in my earlier supplementary question? What did the Hansard Society have in mind when it made that proposal?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
I was planning to address that issue separately because I know that there are witnesses at this meeting who disagree with the power to amend because of the consequential effects that it might have. I am interested in hearing witnesses’ views on whether sifting, more evidence taking and the possibility of amending would be sensible procedural changes to the way that secondary legislation is examined.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
I suppose that my response is that the Pandora’s box has already been opened and there is a lot of legislation out there, so we need to deal with how Governments use it.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
I agree. I will finish with this point, which was alluded to earlier. One of the interesting tests for a minister who is presenting legislation is whether, if a Government with a very different viewpoint was elected at the next election, it could use the legislation to do something that was very different from or even contrary to what was intended. Is that a relevant consideration here? Yes or no answers would be instructive.
I take it from the nods round the table that there is agreement on that, so I will hand back to the convener.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
Are there any other views on that?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
Dr Fox, it sounds as though you are saying that secondary legislation instruments that come before Parliament should be treated as mini-bills, almost by default. Are you saying that they should be scrutinised and deliberated on in much the same way as primary legislation? If so, is that because, in essence, there is no clear distinction between primary and secondary legislation now?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
In summary, the broad set of recommendations about looking at specific powers propose that we sift the instruments and that we consider taking more evidence on secondary legislation and scrutinising it in more detail. In the Scottish Parliament, we have the advantage that we do not have a distinction between bill committees and select committees so, in a sense, we have already addressed that bit. However, if you look at how we scrutinise secondary legislation, you will see that, by and large, the minister will come to a committee to present the instrument and the process is pretty much done at that point.
The suggestion seems to be that there should be a sift and that the length of time for which an instrument has to be laid should be elongated so that committees have the option to take evidence. There has been a bit of scepticism about whether procedure will cut it in this area, but is that roughly the consensus view on what Parliament should do to improve the scrutiny of statutory instruments?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
I can just weave it into my main body of questions, which follows on pretty closely from some of the things that have been discussed.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
I have seen tidying-up clauses that enable Government ministers to alter any enactment. I really object to that.
Just to play devil’s advocate on the point that both Dr Tickell and Dr Grez Hidalgo raised about potentially legitimate Henry VIII powers, what stops those things from being done through one-line bills or, indeed, through more regular tidying-up bills, whereby there is a list of little tidying-up measures that should, in theory—if they are just tidying up—sail through Parliament but would at least have parliamentary scrutiny? Surely that is an alternative way of dealing with those points.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 January 2025
Daniel Johnson
That is a very useful clarification. My observation is that these things work much better if you have clear guard rails, even if you leave the operation to legislation.
I will ask essentially the same question about the so-called Henry VIII powers, which are powers to amend primary legislation. With those powers, do you take broadly the same approach, or are different approaches, principles or even practices set out in your guidance with regard to those sorts of powers?