Seòmar agus comataidhean

It strikes me that the standard consultation that we are all used to, in which the Government publishes a paper and invites responses within a certain timescale, would not work for this kind of thing, given that the subject is constantly evolving. Forums are definitely one way forward, but I am interested in the practicalities of how discussions happen between civil society, bodies such as COSLA and Government. Do you have any further thoughts on that?

Professor Armstrong, in your submission, you write about the application of market access principles, which you have discussed already this morning. I am interested in pursuing the matter of the EU-UK trade and co-operation agreement. What implications will the TCA have for the keeping pace powers?

Those of us who were members of Parliament in the previous session, as veterans of both continuity bills as they went through Parliament, recall your predecessor, Mike Russell, saying that the keeping pace powers were crucial and necessary. I can hear his voice even now saying that. The fact remains, however, that they have not been used. Perhaps more strikingly, there are no current plans to use them. Given that background, we are entitled to ask why not.

There are two important background points to that question. First, there has been a huge amount of EU legislation in the past year: I think that a total of 1,650 legal acts have gone through this year. Secondly, and to reinforce points that Sarah Boyack and Mark Ruskell have made, many people who have made submissions to us want greater rationale and more explanation as to why decisions to align, or not, have been taken.

It is important to make two points about that. There is a difference. First, under the previous provision, you were mandated to do that, whereas it is now a policy choice. Secondly, although we could argue the pros and cons forever, there is now an absence of input at EU level from the UK and Scottish Governments as a result of Brexit. Do you accept that there are now differences in how that works?

Are there other means of alignment through primary or secondary legislation? You have helpfully provided a table that describes what you have transposed using Scottish statutory instruments. Can you help us to understand why you made the choice to use other secondary legislation and not the keeping pace power? I am interested in your comment at the beginning of this discussion when you described the keeping pace power as a “backstop”. Is that how you see it? Is it a safety net to be used when all else fails and there is no other method to use? Is that the best way of understanding the section 1 power?

I just want to pursue that issue. There might be situations in which the Scottish Government chooses positively not to align with EU law. I am trying to think of an example. Say that the EU took a view on the use of pesticides that did not meet the same policy aims as the Scottish Government’s. Do you accept that there could be situations in which you might choose not to align, and not simply because that is not relevant or not necessary? Do you accept that there may be divergence?

Good morning to you both. My question is for Ms Snowden. In your submission, you comment on the need for consultation, which is a point that the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities also makes in its submission. COSLA says that it is anxious to take part in consultation, but has not really had the opportunity to do so.

Given that EU law is a rapidly changing body of law, and that huge amounts of material are produced every year, I want to ask about the practicalities of consultation. How do you see that happening?

Good morning, and thank you for your submissions. I want to stick with the topic of intergovernmental relations, as it strikes me that that issue is absolutely fundamental. My question is a simple one, I hope. What should be the key elements of a new intergovernmental system? Trust and formality have been mentioned, but I would like a basic synopsis of what you think we need.

I have a question for Jess Sargeant. At the start of the session in answer to a question from the convener, you said that the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 is “not an impediment” to the development of common frameworks. Clearly, we are in the early years of the act, but will you expand on what you meant by that?

Good morning, and thank you all for your written submissions. I think that we all accept that we are at an early stage in the process and that a lot of this is about finding our feet and seeing how the legislation and the common frameworks play out. That said, I want to focus on the principle of mutual recognition. Notwithstanding the uncertainty, can you give concrete examples of products—I am particularly focusing on alcohol products and food and drink products in general—that you are concerned about? Is there anything in particular that you are worried about in relation to there being sets of regulatory standards in other parts of the UK that are different to those in Scotland?