Chamber and committees

Ironically, Jeremy, you and I were on the Social Security Committee when the Social Security (Scotland) Bill went through Parliament. I do not remember the framework part of the bill being the biggest issue that we dealt with at that stage; it was more the policy part that we discussed. For me, the most important thing is not how a bill is presented, but how Parliament scrutinises the policy.

Thank you, convener, and good morning to everyone.

As a former member of the committee, I am only too aware of its importance in scrutinising legislation.

When we met in February, we were preparing ourselves, both in the Scottish Government and in the Parliament, to deal with the measures in the United Kingdom Government’s Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill. We anticipated that they would give rise to a high volume of subordinate legislation. The final version of the legislation in the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 means that the volumes will not reach the scale that we expected. Nonetheless, ministers need to be assured that devolved provisions are appropriate, and officials will continue to apprise the committee of expected future volumes in order to assist you in managing your business.

Although retained European Union law implementation has not been as expected, the Parliament continues to process a significant amount of legislation. I record my thanks to the committee and its officials for the constructive manner in which we continue to work with each other in what is an extremely busy and challenging legislative programme.

The Government continues to deliver on its commitment to deliver more Scottish Law Commission bills. I am pleased to note that the committee has been able to lead scrutiny of two bills so far in the current session, including the Trusts and Succession (Scotland) Bill, the stage 1 debate on which will be held this week. I hope that that will continue. As you know, our programme for government confirms that the next Scottish Law Commission bill for introduction will be the judicial factors bill, and the Government expects that it will be suitable for allocation to this committee.

We remain committed to continuing to reduce the backlog of published reports. By the next parliamentary session, we should have addressed the backlog and be focused on recently published reports.

As the committee knows, I take the quality of the instruments that we lay very seriously. It is important that there are as few errors as possible. I am therefore pleased to note that, in the past quarter, no instruments have been reported on serious grounds.

I continue to value the close working relationship that I have sought to build with the committee, and I hope that it continues in the future. I look forward to hearing from everyone on the committee today, and I am happy to take any questions. Otherwise, I will go now.

Greig Walker might have something to add from his experience of retained EU law.

I have no further detail on that. I can come back to the committee with further detail as soon as we have it.

If that were likely to happen, I would probably say so in my one-to-one conversation with the committee convener. From memory, I do not think that there is anything of significance coming up for the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, although I always use the line—kidding on—that the committee is going to get all the legislation that is coming through and the full number of SSIs. On the whole, I do not see anything for this committee. I think that I can guarantee that at this stage, but I will confirm with Steven MacGregor that that is indeed the case.

Rather than repeat myself, I will get Steven MacGregor to add to that.

Good morning, convener and committee members. This is the first opportunity that I have had to welcome Oliver Mundell and Carol Mochan to the committee. As a previous member of the committee, I know very well the important part that it plays in scrutinising all legislation.

We have had a close working relationship since I became the Minister for Parliamentary Business, and I hope that that continues to be the case. When we met in June, I reflected on the fact that the first year of this parliamentary session was very challenging, and the challenges have continued with the cost of living crisis and the situation in Ukraine. As I did in June, I record my thanks to the committee, its officials and the Parliament for the constructive way in which they have worked with the Government over an extremely busy and challenging time.

The remainder of year 2—and, indeed, year 3—will be no less challenging, particularly given the measures that are contained in the United Kingdom Government’s Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill.

We continue to bring a significant amount of legislation to the Parliament. Since September, we have considered six bills, 96 Scottish statutory instruments, eight legislative consent memorandums and 11 UK statutory instruments.

The committee will note that there has been a reduction in the number of SSIs that have been laid by the Government. There is no specific reason for that, but I am delighted to note that, in this quarter, no instruments have been reported on serious grounds. As the committee knows, I take the quality of the instruments that we lay very seriously, and it is important that there are as few errors as possible.

Government and Parliament officials have been working on a protocol for expedited affirmative instruments following the concerns that arose from the use of the made affirmative procedure during the pandemic and from the committee’s inquiry. That work is on-going and is near completion.

When we met in June, I committed to undertake a strategic review of the data and information that the Government currently provides to Parliament. It is worth reminding ourselves of what the Government currently provides; namely, a forward look, every week, of SSIs to be laid in the following two weeks, weekly updates on UK SIs, a fortnightly update on LCMs and a monthly update on bills. That is a substantial amount of data, and it is complemented by regular meetings between officials, and indeed by the meetings that I offer to committee conveners.

My officials have been considering carefully the data and information that we provide to the Parliament and will engage shortly with the committee clerks to seek their input. As ever, it is vital that we work together to ensure that we are providing information and data that is helpful and of value not only to this committee but to the Parliament as a whole.

I look forward to hearing from the committee.

As a rule, we obviously do not want to be having problems with delayed implementation of legislation or 28-day breaches. However, it can be challenging out there for a number of reasons, and there may be situations where we have those problems. All that I can do is assure the committee that I, as the minister, ensure that we try to keep everything within the proper way of doing business. That does not always happen—we are only human and there can be difficulties.

There are also difficulties with regard to information that we might receive from other legislative bodies such as Westminster and from the UK Government, whereby we get to see detail only at the very last minute.

We try to get everything to you in a timeous manner, but it can prove quite challenging.

I will bring in Susan Herbert to see whether she has something to add.

We will come back to the committee about those instruments. On the whole, generally speaking, we try to get these things worked out within the correct time.

Yes, they did. We worked particularly closely with Welsh colleagues on other things, but yes, they also had those experiences in relation to the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, and things have been difficult.