Chamber and committees

On that basis, do you agree that such regulations should have to meet additional requirements and that, therefore, they would have to be laid in draft before the Scottish Parliament before they could be made?

Thank you.

I just want to put some emphasis on things. In light of the Scottish Government’s commitment to work with stakeholders to lodge amendments on the delegated powers, which we are not so excited about, do you have any views specifically on what could or should change? Is there anything in the bill that you feel strongly that you would like to keep?

Thank you very much indeed. I think that we know the answer to this question, but I will ask it anyway. Are there any amendments that could—and, indeed, should—be made to the power as suggested in order to limit its scope? Do you have any views on the requirements attached to the proposed power—for example, the requirement on ministers to consult affected bodies and key stakeholders as set out in the bill—before it can be used?

Thank you. Morag Ross, what is your view?

Thank you very much for your presentation. You are obviously aware of—and you have actually made remarks about—comments that have been made by key legal stakeholders in response to your report and the bill as introduced by the Government. The Government has indicated in response to some of the concerns expressed that it plans to lodge amendments at stage 2. Do you have a response to what it has proposed, and do you have any views specifically in relation to criticisms from legal stakeholders about the delegation of powers in the bill?

Asking this might be too much, because you have not seen what the proposals are as yet, but can you see any way towards a meeting of minds?

Thank you for that, because that is exactly what I was going to ask you about. Given that it is five years since the report was produced, is everything in the report as up to date as it could be?

We are talking about regulations and the legal system. Paragraph 23 of schedule 2 provides that, when a regulator has acted or failed to act in a way that has had, or could have, an adverse impact on the observance of any of the regulatory objectives, and the matter cannot be addressed adequately by ministers taking measures such as setting performance targets or imposing a financial penalty, the Scottish ministers may make regulations to change or remove some or all of the functions of the regulator. The idea is that there would be additional requirements for the regulations, including the need to share them with consultees or lay them in draft before the Scottish Parliament. Do you have any reflections on the delegation of that power? Do you have any concerns about it? The super-affirmative procedure was mentioned earlier. How do you see that working or not working in relation to the exercise of that power?

Is the committee content with the instruments?

Members indicated agreement.