Chamber and committees

You are absolutely right. The clerks put things together when we receive them but, if it is possible, we would appreciate a written response to cover Mr Balfour’s question.

The instrument lays down the rules of procedure that are to apply in the local taxation chamber, which is a new chamber of the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland. The committee identified various errors with the regulations. First, that the preamble cites an enabling power that is not, in fact, relied on for making the instrument and that, if it had been relied on, would have required the instrument to be laid under a different procedure. The Scottish Government proposes to rectify this error by way of a correction slip.

Secondly, the committee also identified a number of cross-referencing errors in rules 20(4), 26(2)(i) and (j), 26(5), 27(1)(b) and 27(2)(a)(iii); a drafting error in regulation 26(2)(i); that the definition in rule 1 of “respondent” could be clearer as to the types of appeal to which it relates; and that rule 20 could be clearer as regards what expenses the tribunal can award. The Scottish Government has committed to addressing those points in an amending instrument before the regulations come into force.

Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on the general reporting ground, in that the preamble cites an enabling power that is not, in fact, relied on for making the instrument and that, if it had been relied on, would have required the instrument to be laid under a different procedure?

Members indicated agreement.

Does the committee wish to note that the Scottish Government proposes to rectify the error by correction slip?

Members indicated agreement.

Does the committee also wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground (h)—“meaning could be clearer”—in that the definition in rule 1 of “respondent” could be clearer as to the types of appeal to which it relates, and that rule 20 could be clearer as regards whether the tribunal may make an order awarding expenses as taxed or whether it can award only a specified sum, and as regards what expenses the award may cover, given the different provision in this regard made in subparagraphs (3) and (5)?

Members indicated agreement.

I thank our guests. They are covering a wide range of areas extremely well. Much is uncertain or even unknown, as was said earlier. However, if they do not mind, I have a couple of quick questions on the sunset date, a year from now. The power to extend that date is granted only to UK ministers. The Scottish Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, Angus Robertson, has said that the Scottish Government has already requested that the extension power be conferred on devolved ministers, as it does not consider it appropriate that only UK ministers have the power to extend the sunset for devolved REUL. There is a bit of debate, obviously. If UK ministers wish to extend the sunset date, including in devolved areas, neither consent nor consultation is required. That is contentious. Does anyone have any points to bring forward on the sunset date?

Yes, it would be. Do you have anything further to add, Sir Jonathan?

Thank you very much indeed. That opens up new areas of debate, but it is useful now, so I thank everyone for their answers.

I thank everyone for making a brave attempt at answering that question.

Sure—thank you very much. Sir Jonathan, do you have anything to add?

That is helpful, thank you. Do you have anything to add, Dr Tucker?