Official Report 652KB pdf
Biocidal Products (Health and Safety) (Amendment and Transitional Provision etc) Regulations 2024
Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (Revocation) Regulations 2024
Our next item of business is consideration of two type 1 consent notifications. These are two instances of the UK Government seeking the Scottish Government’s consent to legislate in an area of devolved competence. The Parliament was notified of the biocidal products proposal on 24 January and the retained European Union law proposal on 30 January. In both cases, the Scottish Government has indicated that it proposes to consent to the instruments being made in the manner that the UK Government has indicated. The committee’s role is to decide whether it agrees with the Scottish Government.
If members are content for consent to be given for the UK statutory instruments being made in the manner proposed by the UK Government, the committee will write to the Scottish Government accordingly. In writing to the Scottish Government on both UK SIs, we have the option to pose questions, highlight issues or ask to be kept up to date on the relevant developments. If the committee is not content with the proposals, however, it may make one of the recommendations that are outlined in the respective notes from the clerks on the instruments.
Do members have any views, first, on the biocidal products UK SI?
I thank the clerks for the papers that they have sent us, which are useful in taking us through the proposals. I say at the outset that I do not have any objections, but I have one or two questions about the extent to which stakeholders can be consulted. The notification states that the instrument is
“not expected to have any significant impact on stakeholders”.
It is good to see the Scottish and UK Governments agreeing. The instruments that are to be revoked are seen as entirely obsolete.
However, I would like more feedback about what monitoring will be done. Some of the statutory instruments that are to be revoked are more than 20 years old, but others are a lot more recent. How will the situation be monitored? The benefit will clearly be a reduced need for animal testing, but I would like more monitoring of the impact of the statutory instrument. It is quite unusual, in terms of parliamentary accountability, to not have feedback from stakeholders, so there is a gap. I understand the logistics and that we need to get the measure through, because otherwise Scotland will miss out.
Those are my comments, having read the background papers.
Unless other members have comments, I will move to a substantive question. Is the committee content that the provision that is set out in the notification should be made in the proposed UK statutory instrument on biocidal products?
Members indicated agreement.
We will write to the Scottish Government to notify it of that. In that letter, we will ask the Government what monitoring will be carried out of the effect of the SI, not only on the Government but on stakeholders.
Moving on, does anyone have any comments on the retained EU law UK SI?
I am content to support the proposal, on the clear understanding that it does not result in any divergence between the UK and the EU, that the revocation of measures is purely technical in nature and that they are indeed now redundant, which is why they are included in the SI.
Unless other members have comments, I will move to a substantive question. Is the committee content that the provisions that are set out in the notification should be made in the proposed UK statutory instrument on retained EU law?
Members indicated agreement.
We will write to the Scottish Government to that effect, including with that a question asking it to clarify that there is no divergence, as per its legislation regarding the EU.
That concludes the public part of the meeting and we will move into private session.
11:30 Meeting continued in private until 11:53.