| SECTION
3.5: |
| THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
|
| |
| Introduction |
| 1. In
considering the detailed process through which
legislation should be made in the Scottish Parliament, we
have been influenced in particular by our key principles
of power-sharing and of access and participation. It is
important that those most affected by legislation should
have the opportunity to influence the development of the
policy leading up to the legislation. We therefore
propose an important role for Committees in the scrutiny
process. We have also sought to ensure that the Executive
is fully accountable to the Parliament on the
legislation, both primary and secondary, which it
introduces. Finally, we have sought to ensure that there
are adequate arrangements in place to enable Committees
to initiate legislation, and for individual Members to
put forward proposals. |
| |
| Primary Legislation |
| 2. One of
the things that will distinguish the Scottish Parliament
from other devolved assemblies is the fact that it will
be able to enact primary legislation on a wide range of
issues affecting Scotland. While we do not envisage that
the Parliament will have to pass significant numbers of
Acts of the Scottish Parliament each year, we expect that
certainly in the first few years it might choose to
consider 10-12 Bills each year, together with a heavy
load of secondary legislation. This section sets out our
proposals for the policy development and pre-legislative
process; the 3 stages of a Bill; legislation originating
in the Executive, Committee and the individual Member;
secondary legislation and private legislation. |
| |
| The policy development process |
| 3. The
design of a uni-cameral Scottish Parliament has led many
to focus on the important role that Committees may play
as the "revising Chamber" in scrutinising draft
legislation. While our proposals for Committees recognise
the need for a strong role for Committees in considering
legislation, we believe that there is a need to extend
the process to form a recognised policy-development
stage. This has been echoed in many of the submissions
made to us. A formal, well-structured, well-understood
process would not only deliver a scrutiny stage
pre-Introduction, but would also allow individuals and
groups to influence the policy-making process at a much
earlier stage than at present. By making the system more
participative, it is intended that better legislation
should result. |
| |
| 4.
Consultation, in the form of inviting comments on
specific legislative proposals for example, would not
meet our aspirations for a participative policy
development process. We have noted elsewhere that there
is a perception among those we consulted (and within our
own group) that once detailed legislative proposals have
been published, in whatever form, it is extremely
difficult for outside organisations to influence changes
to those proposals to any great extent. What is desired
is an earlier involvement of relevant bodies from the
outset - identifying issues which need to be addressed,
contributing to the policy-making process and the
preparation of legislation. |
| |
| 5. There
appears to be little doubt that, while Members and
Committees in the Scottish Parliament will have the power
to initiate legislation, the majority of legislation will
originate from the Executive. This is the case in the
various Parliaments we have looked at. Given that there
should be some form of participative involvement in the
development of legislative proposals, we recommend that
Standing Orders should require Executive Bills to
complete a consultative process before being presented to
Parliament. The role of the Committee would essentially
be a monitoring/enforcing role to ensure the requirement
is met. The Committee would always remain able to take
evidence relating to the legislative proposals if it felt
that the Executive's consultation process had been
insufficient. |
| |
| 6. Under
this model, the relevant Minister would inform the
relevant Committee of the Government's legislative
intentions in its area, including discussion about which
relevant bodies should be involved in the consultation
process. The Executive would, in consultation with the
appropriate bodies, identify the issues to be addressed
and the policy to be introduced. The Committee should be
kept informed of progress. When the draft legislation is
introduced by the Executive, Standing Orders should
require such drafts to be accompanied by a memorandum
explaining the need for the legislation, the options
considered, the consultative process undertaken, and the
degree of consensus reached. Committees would be able to
monitor the Executive's performance in this area, and to
take additional evidence if necessary. The benefits of
this model include: |
- involving
relevant bodies in the development of policy and
the legislative process at an early stage;
- allowing the
Executive, as the elected Government, to take
forward its policies;
- ensuring proper
participative consultation by the Executive
through giving Committees a supervisory role;
- freeing up valuable
Committee time, allowing Committees to focus on
proposals which have already been the subject of
participative involvement of interested bodies.
|
| |
| Introduction of a Bill |
| 7. We recommend that the Scottish Parliament
should have the ability to require Bills to be presented
in a particular form. We favour the model used in some
continental Parliaments where a Bill is prefixed by a
memorandum (separate from the preamble which forms part
of the completed Act) explaining: |
- the nature of
the problem it is intended to address, and the
strategic approach;
- the options
considered, and why this particular option was
chosen;
- the consultative
process undertaken;
- the best estimated
costs, benefits and financial implications;
- possibly, such other
criteria as the impact on sustainable
development, equal opportunities, implications
for Islands communities, human rights and
business cost compliance.
|
| |
| 8. Before or
on the introduction of a Bill, the Presiding Officer is
required by section 31 of the Scotland Act to decide
whether or not, in his or her view, the provisions of the
Bill would be within the legislative competence of the
Parliament, and to state his or her decision. |
| |
| 9. We
propose that a Bill should not be introduced before the
draft Bill is first referred to the Presiding Officer for
his or her consideration. The interpretation of the
legislative competence of the Parliament is legally
complex and cases may arise where there is genuine
uncertainty as to where the boundary should be drawn. The
Presiding Officer may want to consult a legal adviser
before reaching his or her decision, but that need not be
prescribed in Standing Orders. Standing Orders should
provide for the form of the statement of a decision by
the Presiding Officer on legislative competence to the
Parliament and for it to be published. |
| |
| Stages of a Bill |
| 10. The
Scotland Act (section 36) requires Standing Orders to
provide 3 stages in the consideration of a Bill. We
recommend that Stage 1, debate and vote on the principles
of the Bill, should be conducted in Plenary. A Bill, once
introduced, should be referred to the relevant Committee,
which should consider and report on the general
principles in the Bill, to inform a debate and vote on
the principles of the Bill in the Plenary session. |
| |
| 11. The role
of the Committee as proposed would be to provide a report
to the Parliament as to whether or not the Bill should be
approved in principle. It would not at this stage be a
detailed consideration on a line by line basis of the
Bill's content. At this stage, the Committee would also
be able to comment on the Memorandum accompanying the
Bill, in particular on the extent of consultation
undertaken, and to recommend whether further evidence
should be taken to inform the next stage of consideration
of the Bill. |
| |
| 12.
Following a debate and positive vote in Plenary on the
principles of the Bill, the Bill should be referred again
to Committee for detailed consideration. Where there are
2 or more interested Committees, one Committee should be
identified as the "lead" and other interested
Committees should submit their views to the lead
Committee within a specified time. |
| |
| 13. A
specified period should be required to elapse between the
debate and vote in Plenary on the principles of the Bill,
and detailed consideration in Committee. During this
period all MSPs should have the opportunity to propose
amendments to the Bill, which would require to be
considered in Committee. If further evidence were to be
taken, it should be done during this period. |
| |
| 14.
Committee stage should be able to be taken by the Plenary
rather than being remitted to an individual subject
Committee. |
| |
| 15. The
third stage of the Bill should be a debate and final vote
on the Bill, as amended in Committee. The Bill returned
to the Plenary from the subject Committee should be
accompanied by a report explaining the Committee's
reasons for the amendments made. Plenary should then
consider the Committee report. Further amendments should
be allowed at this stage. Standing Orders should specify
tight criteria for what sorts of amendments might be
moved. The Bill as then amended should in Plenary session
be passed or rejected by the Scottish Parliament. A
quorum of Members, equivalent to at least 25% of the
total number of seats, would be required to vote, to
allow a final decision on a Bill to be taken on a simple
majority vote. |
| |
| 16. Where
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has decided
that a Bill, or any of its provisions, are outwith the
legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, (or
where the Secretary of State has made an order
prohibiting the Presiding Officer from submitting the
Bill for Royal Assent) the Bill or its relevant
provisions would have to be amended. It should be open to
the Executive to propose to withdraw the Bill at this
stage, subject to the Parliament's agreement. If the
Executive does not withdraw the Bill, then the Bill
should be remitted to the relevant Committee for
amendment to address the problem identified by the JCPC,
before being approved or rejected by the Parliament. |
| |
| 17. Standing
Orders should allow for the minimum requirements for gaps
between stages of Bills, and for proceedings to be
expedited in the case of Bills which the Parliament
agrees are emergency Bills. For example, it might not be
necessary to remit such a Bill to Committee before the
debate and vote on the principle of the Bill. Such Bills,
needed to deal with emergency situations, might be
introduced by a member of the Scottish Executive as an
"urgent Bill", put to the vote, and if accepted
as an urgent Bill by the Parliament, should be subject to
a shortened scrutiny. |
| |
| Bills Initiated in Committee |
| 18. The SCC
report and the White Paper "Scotland's
Parliament" envisaged the possibility of Bills being
initiated by Committees of the Parliament. We endorse the
proposal that Committees should have the power to
initiate legislation (see section 3.2). |
| |
| 19. We
recommend that Committees of the Scottish Parliament
should have the capacity to conduct inquiries (which
would include the taking of written and oral evidence) on
the need for legislation or further legislation in any
area within their terms of reference. The Committees
should report on such inquiries, with recommendations;
such reports might include reference to the matters on
which the Scottish Executive is required to provide
information when promoting a public Bill (in a manner
consistent with a legislative proposal as opposed to a
draft Bill). In a Plenary session, the Scottish
Parliament would adopt, or reject, the Report. The
question of what should happen then needs to be
clarified. If the Executive were required to provide a
response to such Committee reports, before the Plenary
debate, then it should be clear whether the Executive
intended to introduce legislation on the lines proposed.
If not, then the adoption of the Report by the Parliament
should provide authority for the legislation to be
drafted, within a given time if that is specified by the
resolution of the Parliament. The Committee Convener
should be authorised to instruct the preparation of a
Bill on behalf of the Committee, within a given time if
that is specified by the resolution of the Parliament. If
the Executive indicated that it would bring forward the
relevant legislation, then the Committee should not
proceed to instruct. |
| |
| 20.
Following introduction and a general debate and vote on
the Bill in Plenary session, the Bill should follow the
same procedure as proposed above for Bills proposed by
the Executive with the exception that the detailed
scrutiny of the Bill at its Committee stage might be
undertaken in Plenary session. |
| |
| Private Members' Bills |
| 21.
Individual Members should be entitled to submit written
proposals for legislation to the Presiding Officer. Such
proposals should be brought before the Plenary if either
they could secure the support of a minimum number of MSPs
(perhaps 10% of the total), or by submitting them to the
relevant subject Committee which should then have a
discretionary competence to initiate an inquiry on the
need for such legislation and to report to the Scottish
Parliament. We also recommend that individual members
should be able to introduce no more than 2 Bills in any
Parliamentary session. |
| |
| Legislative session |
| 22. We
propose that the Scottish Parliament should adopt a
4-year legislative session. This would allow more time
for proper scrutiny and would avoid important Bills being
"lost" at the end of the annual cycle. |
| |
| 23. It is
proposed elsewhere in this report that the Executive
should announce its forward legislative programme for the
full Parliamentary session soon after each election. (In
practical terms, this would most likely be when
Parliament resumed following the summer recess after the
May election.) It should, however, be open to the
Executive to come forward with a revised programme from
time to time throughout the session, to enable it to
respond to changing circumstances. Indeed, the Executive
should be required to inform Parliament annually of its
planned timetable for bringing forward legislation. |
| |
| Bills - Queen's Consent |
| 24. Schedule
3, paragraph 7 of the Scotland Act requires that Standing
Orders provide for ensuring that a Bill containing
provisions which would, if the Bill were a Bill for an
Act of the UK Parliament, require the consent of Her
Majesty, the Prince and Steward of Scotland or the Duke
of Cornwall, shall not pass unless such consent has been
signified to the Parliament. |
| |
| 25. It is
proposed that, in the case of Executive Bills, the onus
should be placed on Departments of the Executive to
recognise that consent should be sought, and arrange for
the First Minister to write requesting the necessary
consent from Her Majesty. In the case of Private Members'
Bills and Committee Bills we propose that the office of
the Parliament which handles legislation should alert the
Private Member or the Committee Convener who would ask
either the First Minister or the Presiding Officer to
obtain Queen's Consent. |
| |
| 26. Once Her
Majesty's consent has been received, the Presiding
Officer should be notified and should ensure that a note
was put on the Order Paper, stating that Her Majesty's
Consent has been signified. To ensure accuracy, the Clerk
of the Parliament (or one of his or her assistants) could
endorse the record copy of the Bill. |
| |
| Subordinate Legislation |
| 27. The
Interpretation Act 1978 describes subordinate legislation
as "Orders in Council, orders, rules, regulations,
schemes, warrants, bylaws and other instruments made or
to be made under any Act". Generally speaking,
subordinate legislation allows the Executive (subject to
Parliamentary approval) to fill in the details of the
implementation of policy already agreed by the Parliament
in primary legislation. |
| Position |
| 28. Until
such time as the Scottish Parliament chooses to make its
own legislation to provide for the passage of subordinate
legislation through the Parliament, the Statutory
Instruments Act 1946, with modifications to suit the
circumstances of the Scottish Parliament, will be
applied. Initially, Standing Orders will have to reflect
the transitional arrangements, although such Standing
Orders may need to be adjusted should the Scottish
Parliament decide to enact its own legislation. |
| |
| General |
| 29. It is
common at Westminster for detailed implementing
provisions to be prescribed in secondary legislation.
Such provision can have a significant impact on those
affected by the provisions. Because of the volume of
secondary legislation it is often difficult for
interested groups and individuals to keep track of
proposals, and consultation on secondary legislation is
limited. There should be meaningful consultation on
secondary legislation before it is laid before the
Scottish Parliament. The Parliament should seek to ensure
that significant provisions are included in primary
rather than secondary legislation. |
|
|
| Committees |
| 30. We
propose that all subordinate legislation from the
Executive which is required to be laid in the Parliament,
should be sent both to the relevant subject Committee and
to a delegated legislation Committee, similar to the
current Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments (JCSI)
which serves both Houses at Westminster. Such a Committee
would have two main functions: it would examine the
provisions within Bills conferring powers to make
subordinate legislation, and it would examine subordinate
legislation brought before the Parliament, not from a
policy perspective but to assess whether it was intra-vires.
The Committee would be able to report its concerns on any
technical aspect of subordinate legislation. |
| |
| 31. All
subordinate legislation should be passed to the subject
Committee, which would want to consider all subordinate
legislation coming before it. However the Committee would
neither want, nor be able, to debate all subordinate
legislation in detail. It is proposed that the Committee
might look at a weekly list of all subordinate
legislation submitted and consider which it would like to
examine in more detail perhaps in debate. It would be
informed by reports from the Committee on subordinate
legislation. In the case of affirmative Statutory
Instruments (where the approval of the Parliament will be
necessary) it is likely that the Committee would want to
consider the proposed legislation and report to the
Parliament with its recommendations. In the case of
Statutory Instruments subject to negative resolution, the
Committee would have 40 days to decide whether it wished
to oppose the piece of legislation. The Committee could
choose to debate the SI in Committee, with a report and a
motion going to Plenary as a result of the Committee
debate. If the Committee felt that the legislation, or
their concerns about it, were of sufficient significance
that they wanted the legislation to be debated in
Plenary, the Committee would indicate this to the
Business Committee. |
| |
| 32. It will
of course be open to all MSPs to "pray against"
negative subordinate legislation. (The term is used in
the Statutory Instruments Act 1946, and means simply that
Members may indicate their objection to a piece of
subordinate legislation. The term "pray
against" must be used until the Scottish Parliament
decides its own legislation. We recommend that in any new
provisions, more accessible language should be used.) In
the first instance MSPs should indicate their concerns to
the relevant Committee, which could consider whether it
wished to debate the legislation and consider whether it
wished to recommend that the Plenary should be asked to
vote on the legislation. MSPs would be able to explain
their concerns to the Committee. It would also be open to
MSPs to make their views known to the Business Committee
if they felt that legislation should be debated in
Plenary. |
| |
| 33. It is
also proposed that, if debate on an affirmative SI has
taken place in Committee and a report laid before the
Parliament, there is less need for further debate to take
place in Plenary, unless such consideration is
recommended by the subject Committee or the Business
Committee. A vote should normally suffice. A similar
procedure should be put in place for negative SIs where
the Committee recommends annulment. No action would be
required if the Committee had agreed that no opposition
should be made. |
| |
| Private Legislation |
| 34. In
Scotland, when local authorities or other bodies (eg
Railtrack) wish to obtain Parliamentary powers, they may
proceed through the promotion of a draft Provisional
Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland)
Act 1936. The detailed procedures which deal with
Scottish private legislation are laid down in a set of
General Orders (the equivalent of Standing Orders) under
the 1936 Act. It is intended that under the general power
to prescribe transitional arrangements, the Secretary of
State will prescribe that, until such time as the
Scottish Parliament enacts its own legislation for
handling private legislation, procedures mirroring those
in the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act 1936
will apply to private legislation promoted on devolved
matters, except that, where there are references to the
UK Parliament, these should be interpreted as meaning the
Scottish Parliament and references to the Secretary of
State should be interpreted as being to the Scottish
Ministers. For the purpose of the Standing Orders,
therefore, we have assumed that the 1936 procedures will
apply. It is, therefore, proposed that until the Scottish
Parliament makes its own legislation, the General Orders
from Westminster should simply be replicated (and
modified where necessary to take account of the Scottish
Parliament) in the Scottish Parliament's Standing Orders.
|
|
|
| Summary of Recommendations for
Standing Orders |
| Standing Orders should: |
| |
- require draft Bills
on Introduction to be accompanied by a memorandum
explaining the consultative process undertaken
and the degree of consensus reached, as well as
- the nature of the
problem it is intended to address, and the
strategic approach;
- the options
considered, and why this particular option was
chosen;
- the consultative
process undertaken;
- the best estimated
costs, benefits and financial implications;
- possibly, such other
criteria as the impact on sustainable
development, equal opportunities, implications
for Islands communities, human rights and
business cost compliance.
- provide that a Bill
should not be introduced before the draft Bill is
first referred to the Presiding Officer for his
or her consideration.
- provide the form of
the statement of a decision by the Presiding
Officer on legislative competence; and for it to
be published.
- provide that a Bill,
once introduced, should be referred to the
relevant Committee, which should consider and
report on the general principles of the Bill to
inform a debate and vote in Plenary. At this
stage the Committee should also be able to
comment on the Memorandum accompanying the Bill
and to recommend whether further evidence should
be taken to inform the next stage of
consideration of the Bill.
- provide that
following a debate and positive vote in Plenary
on the principles of the Bill, the Bill should be
referred to Committee for detailed consideration.
- provide that all MSPs
should have the opportunity to propose amendments
to a Bill, which should be considered in
Committee.
- provide that
Committee Stage should be able to be taken by the
Plenary.
- provide that the Bill
returned to Plenary from Committee should be
accompanied by a report, explaining the
Committee's reasons for the amendments.
- provide that further
amendments, subject to tightly specified criteria
should be allowed at this stage.
- provide that for the
final vote to accept or reject a Bill, a quorum
of Members, equivalent to at least 25% of the
total number of seats in the Parliament should be
required to vote. A simple majority of those
voting would be required for a Bill to be
amended.
- provide for expedited
procedures for Bills which the Parliament agrees
are emergency Bills.
- provide that
Committees should be able to conduct inquiries,
take evidence and report to the Parliament with
recommendations for legislation.
- make provision for
the Parliament, in Plenary, to adopt or reject
the Report.
- provide that if the
Committee's proposals for legislation are
accepted, and the Executive does not indicate
that it will bring forward such legislation, the
Committee Convener should be authorised to
instruct the preparation of a Bill on behalf of
the Committee.
- provide that
individual Members should be entitled to submit
written proposals for legislation to the
Presiding Officer. Such proposals should be
brought before the Plenary if either they could
secure the support of a minimum number of MSPs
(perhaps 10% of the total), or by submitting them
to the relevant subject Committee which should
then have a discretionary competence to initiate
an inquiry on the need for such legislation and
to report to the Scottish Parliament.
- make provision for
signifying Queen's Consent when necessary.
- require all
subordinate legislation from the Executive which
is required to be laid in the Parliament, to be
sent both to the relevant subject Committee and
to the Delegated Legislation Committee.
- in the case of
private legislation, replicate the relevant
General Orders at Westminster (with appropriate
modifications).
|