Robin Rigg Offshore Wind Farm (Navigation and Fishing) (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 1
Introduced on: 15 May 2003
Introduced by: Offshore Energy Resources Limited and Solway Offshore Limited (Private Bill)
Passed: 26 June 2003
Royal Assent: 1 August 2003

2003 asp 19

Passage of the Bill

Originally introduced on 27 June 2002, the Robin Rigg Offshore Wind Farm (Navigation and Fishing) (Scotland) Bill was the first private bill to be introduced in the first session of the Scottish Parliament (as SP Bill 59). SPICe Briefing 02/88 summarises the main elements of the private bill procedure and the main elements of the Bill.

The Bill was considered by the Robin Rigg Offshore Wind Farm (Navigation and Fishing) (Scotland) Bill Committee, which was formed on 3 October 2002. The Preliminary Stage debate was held on the 9 January 2003. The Bill subsequently fell, as a consequence of the May 2003 general election, but was re-introduced as SP Bill 1 on 15 May 2003.

Standing Orders allow a private bill, which has completed its Consideration Stage, to be reintroduced at the start of the next session in the same form as it was agreed prior to dissolution. The Bill does not have to go through repeat Preliminary or Consideration Stages. The Bill was passed following the Final Stage debate on the 26 June 2003.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

Private bills are different to public bills, and are subject to different parliamentary procedures. Public bills involve only changes to the general law and matters of public policy. Private bills are different in that they involve measures sought in the private interests of the promoter of the bill, a private individual or company. The promoters of this Bill are Offshore Energy Resources Limited and Solway Offshore Limited. They hold adjacent leases of parts of the seabed on the Robin Rigg sand banks in the Solway Firth. They plan to install 30 turbines each which will be up to 80m in height, with blade diameter of 100m. The right of peaceful navigation and the right to fish are public rights in Scotland. Constructing and operating the turbines would interfere with the public rights of navigation and fishing, therefore the Bill provides for local restrictions on these rights in the vicinity of the wind farm site. The Bill establishes three levels of exclusion zone around the turbines for “construction” “trawling and anchoring” and a permanent “general” zone.

The promoters will seek additional consents under the Electricity Act 1989 for the licensing of the turbines and the right to generate electricity, and under the Coastal Protection Act and the Food and Environmental Protection Act to allow them to install equipment in the sea. These licenses can be issued under existing legislation, and so are not included in the Bill.

Once construction is complete, the site will supply enough electricity for 160,000 homes. Offshore wind energy is one of the sources of renewable energy which is being developed in Scotland to help meet the Scottish Executive’s targets of 18% of electricity coming from renewable sources by 2010, and 40% by 2020.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill as introduced had 8 sections and 3 schedules. The key provision of the Bill is section 1 which allows the public rights of navigation and fishing to be restricted in the vicinity of the wind farm site. The schedules contained detailed provisions on the construction and location of the turbines and on the exclusion zones around them.

Parliamentary consideration

Third parties may object to private bills. These objections are considered by the private bill committee, which may take evidence from the promoters of the bill and the objectors. There were four objectors to the Bill, two from sailing interests, one from a fishermen’s organisation and one from a private individual. The Committee reported on these objections on the 14 March 2003, and suggested some amendments to the Bill as a result - that there should be provisions in the Bill providing for decommissioning of the site, and introducing a requirement to consult with local interests on the lighting and marking of the site while in construction. These amendments were made during the Consideration Stage of the Bill.

The main amendments agreed during the Final Stage consideration of the Bill removed section 5, schedule 2 and schedule 3 of the Bill, which established the different exclusion zones around the site. This followed discussions between the promoters of the Bill, the Scottish Executive and the UK Department for Transport, which concluded that instead of making special statutory provision for an exclusion zone in the Bill, it would be preferable to use existing powers under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 to enforce the exclusion zones. These amendments mean that the Bill as passed has 10 sections and one schedule.

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 2
Introduced on: 15 May 2003
Introduced by: Clackmannanshire Council (Private Bill)
Passed: 1 July 2004
Royal Assent: 10 August 2004

2004 asp 10

Passage of the Bill

The Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill [SP Bill 2] was introduced in the Parliament on 15 May 2003. The 60 day period for objections ended on 7 July 2003, resulting in 55 admissible objections. A Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill Committee was established and met for the first time on 25 September 2003. The Committee published its Preliminary Stage Report on 5 December 2003, which was debated by the Parliament on 11 December 2003. On 17 December 2003 the Parliament passed a financial resolution on the Bill. The Committee then commenced the Consideration Stage of the Bill, which resulted in the publication of its Consideration Stage Report on 27 May 2004.

The Bill was passed following the Final Phase debate held on 1 July 2004.

The Bill received Royal Assent on 10 August 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill is required to authorise the reconstruction of a railway between Stirling and Kincardine, as well as other works associated with the reopening of the railway.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill grants the promoter, and their successors, the powers to rebuild the railway between Stirling and Kincardine as well as authorising the construction of other works associated with the reopening of the railway. To this end the promoter is granted a power of compulsory purchase and the power to stop-up roads and footpaths where necessary.

Parliamentary consideration

Although raising some minor concerns, particularly regarding the potential lifespan of Longannet power station, the Committee and Parliament agreed the general principles of the Bill at the Preliminary Stage. The Committee did not uphold any of the remaining 52 objections at the Consideration Stage, although they did request additional information on compensation and mitigation measures. Several minor amendments were agreed without contest during the second phase of the Consideration Stage. No amendments were moved at the Final Stage.

Education (School Meals) (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 3
Introduced on: 28 May 2003
Introduced by: Peter Peacock (Executive Bill)
Passed: 11 June 2003
Royal Assent: 7 July 2003

2003 asp 18

Passage of the Bill

The Education (School Meals) (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 3] was introduced on 28 May 2003, together with a Policy Memorandum and Explanatory Notes. There was no evidence taking in committee at Stage 1. The Stage 1 debate was held on 4 June 2003. Stage 2 was held as a Committee of the whole parliament on the same day as Stage 3 on 11 June 2003.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill has one purpose – to make an amendment to section 53 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 to add an additional criterion by which pupils qualify for free school meals.

Provisions of the Bill

Under section 53 of the 1980 Act pupils who are, or whose parents are, in receipt of certain benefits qualify for free school meals. Due to changes in the benefits system under the Tax Credits Act 2002, around 6500 school children would lose their entitlement. The Bill therefore contains an order making power to cover this and other potential changes in the benefits system.

Parliamentary consideration

A number of Standing Orders were suspended in order that this Bill could make rapid progress. There was no committee stage, and Stages 2 and 3 were taken on the same day a week after the Stage 1 debate.

In debate, although the Minister stressed that this was a ‘technical’ measure there was much discussion of wider issues, in particular universal free school meals in relation to a member’s bill by Tommy Sheridan in the first session. A number of amendments were put forward to extend entitlement to those receiving a wider range of benefits. None of these amendments were successful.

Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill 2004

Bill Number: SP Bill 4
Introduced: 23 June 2003
Introduced by: Malcolm Chisholm (Executive Bill)
Passed: 18 December 2003
Royal Assent: 27 January 2004

2004 asp 1

Passage of the Bill

The Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill 2004 [SP Bill 4] was introduced on 23 June 2003 and the Health Committee designated lead committee. The Committee took evidence at stage 1 on 2 September 2003. The Committee reported on the general principles on 6 October 2003, Stage 1 Report and the Stage 1 debate was held on 29 October 2003. Stage 2 amendments were considered on 25 November and 2 December. The Stage 3 debate was held on 18 December 2003 following which the Bill was passed.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill as passed underpins the new contract for General Practitioners (GPs), which was approved in a ballot of GPs. The Bill amends the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978 and the National Health Service (Primary Care) Act 1997, in light of the white paper Partnership for Care.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill makes provision for primary care services and covers the duties of Health Boards and the contract terms of general practitioners. It covers both general medical services (GMS) and personal medical services (section 17C services). It places duties on Health Boards to secure the provision of these services.

The Bill defines general medical services as ‘essential’, ‘additional’ and ‘enhanced’, to be provided according to defined rules. Contracts are intended to be sufficiently flexible in duration to be locally responsive. The Bill allows Ministers to introduce regulations defining, among other matters, who may enter into PMS contracts, what services are to be regarded as primary medical services, the circumstances in which a performer can or must accept a patient as part of the provider’s responsibility and the circumstances under which contractors may unilaterally vary the terms of the contract. Some of the draft regulations were provided prior to Stage 3, at the request of the Health Committee.

The Bill replaces the existing GMS legislation and makes provision for NHS Boards to contract with GP practices rather than individual GPs. It also provides the mechanism for allocating PMS resources to practices, and places on NHS Boards the duty to provide primary medical services, or the commissioning of care from other providers.

A National Reference Group - including stakeholders from NHSScotland, the relevant professions and the Health Department of the Scottish Executive - will develop project plans to address the following issues:

• out of hours service provision
• maintenance and monitoring of the Quality and Outcomes Framework
• organisational development work required to identify and support new Stakeholder functions and relationships
• service redesign to model arrangements for opting-in and opting-out of service provision
• modelling the financial flows in the new contract
• development and funding of practice premises

Parliamentary consideration

During Stage 1 (consideration of the general principles) the Committee took oral evidence at one meeting, 9 September 2003,from representatives of health councils and patients.

The Committee agreed with the general principles in its report although it expressed concerns about the provisions for regulations.

The Committee considers that the lack of Regulations is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and a cause of great concern. It is the Committee's role to scrutinise legislation and the probable impact of such legislation. Without sight of the Regulations this Committee's role has been severely compromised and we are unable to fulfil our scrutiny function (para 104)

In response to Committee concerns the Minister agreed to provide draft regulations prior to Stage 2.

Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 5
Introduced on: 23 June 2003
Introduced by: Cathy Jamieson (Executive Bill)
Passed: 4 March 2004
Royal Assent: 14 April 2004

2004 asp 3

Passage of the Bill

The Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 5] was introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 23 June 2003. The Justice 2 Committee, as lead committee, commenced taking Stage 1 oral evidence on the general principles of the Bill at its meeting on 2 September 2003. The Stage 1 (general principles) debate took place on 19 November 2003 and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 debate on 4 March 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The main policy objectives of the Bill are:

• To widen the categories of witnesses who may be considered ‘vulnerable’ and in consequence eligible to benefit from the use of special measures when giving evidence
• To improve the quality of evidence given by vulnerable witnesses, in particular children
• To enable and encourage greater use of special measures for these witnesses in all types of court proceedings

The Executive’s programme of work on this part of the law of evidence began in November 1998 with the launch of the consultation document ‘Towards a Just Conclusion’ (Scottish Executive 1998), on vulnerable and intimidated witnesses in criminal and civil cases. The consultation was followed by the ‘Towards a Just Conclusion Action Plan’ (Scottish Executive 2000), which made various commitments in relation to vulnerable witnesses more generally. The Sexual Offences (Procedure and Evidence) Scotland Act 2002 fulfilled the first commitment of the Action Plan which was to improve the way in which victims in sex offence cases give evidence.

Provisions of the Bill

The Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Bill follows on from the commitment in paragraph 2.12 of the Action plan which sought to improve the law of evidence as it relates to vulnerable and intimidated witnesses. The Bill is in 3 parts; Part 1 – Criminal Proceedings; Part 2 – Civil Proceedings; and Part 3 – Miscellaneous and General.

Part 1 of the Bill deals with evidential and procedural matters for vulnerable witnesses giving evidence in criminal proceedings. The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 will be amended to define the categories of vulnerable witnesses and the special measures which are available to allow witnesses to give their evidence. This part of the Bill also provides that an accused in a trial will be prevented from conducting his own defence and cross-examining child witnesses in cases of violent assault, culpable homicide and murder, where the child is less than 12 years of age.

Under Part 2 of the Bill, vulnerable witnesses in civil cases will also be able to use special measures i.e. television link, screens, the use of a supporter and evidence on commission.

Part 3 of the Bill abolishes the competence test for witnesses in criminal and civil proceedings and provides that the evidence of any person called as a witness in criminal or civil proceedings is not inadmissible solely because the witness does not understand either the nature of the duty of a witness to give truthful evidence, or the difference between truth and lies. The intention is that all witnesses, particularly the most vulnerable, should be given the opportunity to be heard and that the court should be able to consider all the relevant evidence in a case.

Parliamentary consideration

In its Stage 1 Report, the Justice 2 Committee stated that, subject to comments in the Report, the Committee agreed that the Executive had struck the right balance between the protection of vulnerable witnesses and the rights of the accused to a fair trial and that the Committee therefore recommended that the Parliament agreed to the general principles of the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Bill. However, a number of amendments were brought forward at Stage 2 which reflected some of the concerns and comments made by the Committee in the Stage 1 Report.

An amendment brought forward by Karen Whitefield MSP sought to introduce a rule prohibiting the accused from conducting his or her defence in person in violent crime cases that involve child witnesses under the age of 12. Despite a concern raised by Nicola Sturgeon MSP that such a blanket prohibition would tip the balance too far in the wrong direction, the Executive agreed that even if special measures are used, a young child witness might be distressed if they could see or identify the accused conducting his or her defence and therefore accepted the amendment.

Also, in its Stage 1 report, the Justice 2 Committee was of the view that a witness who has given evidence should be able to act as a supporter. The Executive was persuaded by the committee's arguments that a general rule excluding a witness from acting as a supporter was not appropriate. Accordingly, amendments brought forward at Stage 2 would allow a person who is nominated by the vulnerable witness and who is to give evidence at the trial to act as a supporter once he or she has given evidence.

National Health Service Reform (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 6
Introduced on: 26 June 2003
Introduced by: Malcolm Chisholm (Executive Bill)
Passed: 6 May 2004
Royal Assent: 11 June 2004

2004 asp 7

Passage of the Bill

The National Health Service Reform (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 6] was introduced in the Parliament on 26 June 2003. Stage 1 began on 2 December 2003, with the Health Committee as the lead committee. The Stage 1 debate took place on 3 March 2004, and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 6 May 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The primary aim of the Bill is to reform the organisation and management of the NHS in Scotland in a bid to achieve a decentralised, integrated health care service. The Bill seeks to do this through changes to the system’s structure and organisation, devolving decision-making and resources to front-line staff, increasing public involvement in NHS decision-making and developing regional planning and services. These reforms were announced in the white paper Partnership for Care.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill makes the following provisions:

• it removes the statutory powers of NHS Trusts;
• it requires NHS Boards to establish Community Health Partnerships;
• it places a duty on NHS Boards to co-operate with other NHS bodies in the planning and delivery of services;
• it gives Ministers greater powers to intervene where a health body is deemed to be failing;
• it places a duty on Ministers and NHS Boards to promote health improvement;
• it places a duty on NHS Boards to involve the public more closely in planning, developing and operating the NHS;
• it places a requirement on NHS Boards to ensure staff are well informed, appropriately trained, fairly treated and involved in the decisions that affect them; and
• it requires NHS Boards to encourage equal opportunities when discharging their duties.

Parliamentary consideration

The Health Committee’s deliberations centred on whether the structural changes proposed would achieve the policy objectives of the Bill. The committee felt that these changes would need to be accompanied by a cultural change in the NHS. Much debate also centred on the need to dissolve local health councils and the perceived independence of the new national health council within NHS Quality Improvement Scotland.

The Health Committee also shared the concerns of the Finance Committee over some aspects of the Financial Memorandum, especially the cost estimates resulting from any interventions in failing services and who would foot the bill, the duty to involve the public, the reorganisation of existing structures, and the creation of the Scottish Health Council following the dissolution of the local health councils.

The main changes to the Bill in its passage through Parliament came from the inclusion of two Executive amendments, which place a duty on NHS Boards in relation to staff governance and also require them to consider equal opportunities when carrying out their functions.

Prostitution Tolerance Zones (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 7
Introduced on: 8 September 2003
Introduced by: Margo MacDonald (Member’s Bill)
Withdrawn: 30 November 2005

Passage of the Bill

The Prostitution Tolerance Zones (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 7] was introduced in the Parliament by Margo Macdonald MSP on 8 September 2003. Stage 1 commenced on 2 March 2004 with the Local Government and Transport Committee as the lead committee. There was no Stage 1 debate on the general principles of the Bill. The Bill was withdrawn on 30 November 2005

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill proposed to give local authorities the power to designate ‘tolerance zones’ within which soliciting, loitering or importuning by prostitutes for the purposes of prostitution would not be an offence under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982.

Other stated objectives of the Bill were:

• to enable the police, health boards and local authorities to ensure that prostitution is practised in as orderly, secure and tolerable a manner as possible
• to minimise the opportunities for associated criminal behaviour
• to maximise the practice of safer sex and to promote public health policies

The objectives of the Bill were the same as those for the Prostitution Tolerance Zones (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 67], introduced by Margo MacDonald on 28 October 2002, in Session 1.

Provisions of the Bill

The main provision of the Bill was to allocate power to local authorities to designate areas as tolerance zones. In order to do this a local authority would have to go through the specified consultation process.

Provisions were made to allow for appeals to be made by anyone aggrieved by the making of a tolerance zone designation, and for the police working within an area where the tolerance zone is located to apply to the local authority to have the zone suspended or modified.

The Bill also specified that nothing done in a public place lying within a prostitution tolerance zone, during such times as that zone is in operation, would lead to an offence being committed under Section 46 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982.

Parliamentary consideration

An expert group on prostitution was set up by the Scottish Executive in 2003 as a result of the earlier Bill introduced by Margo MacDonald in 2002. Margo MacDonald was a member of the expert group. Evidence at Stage 1 began in March 2004. A key issue for consideration of the Bill was when the expert group would report and what the Scottish Executive response to the group’s findings would be. The Local Government and Transport Committee resolved to consider all information before agreeing to the general principles of the Bill at stage 1.

The expert group published its report, fully supported by Margo MacDonald, for consultation in March 2005. It recommended that criminalisation of soliciting should be replaced by a legal focus on offensive behaviour arising from a prostitution-related sexual transaction. In response to the expert group, on 1 November 2005 the Scottish Executive undertook to create a new offence focusing on the nuisance or harm arising from street prostitution-related activities, whether caused by seller or purchaser. This offence was to replace the existing soliciting offence.

As a consequence, the Member’s Bill was withdrawn on 30 November 2005.

Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 8
Introduced on: 11 September 2003
Introduced by: Scottish Borders Council (Private Bill)
Passed: 14 June 2006
Royal Assent: 24 July 2006

2006 asp 13

Passage of the Bill

The Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 8] was introduced in the Parliament on 11 September 2003. The initial 60 day period for objections ended on 10 November 2003, resulting in 118 admissible objections. The Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill Committee was established and met for the first time on 10 February 2004. The Committee published its Preliminary Stage Report on 22 July 2005, which was debated by the Parliament on 28 September 2005. The general principles of the Bill were agreed by a vote in which 104 members voted for the Bill and one abstained. The Committee then commenced the Consideration Stage of the Bill, which resulted in the publication of its Consideration Stage Report on 9 May 2006. The Bill was passed following the Final Phase debate held on 14 June 2006 in which 114 members voted for the Bill, one abstained and one voted against. The Bill received Royal Assent on 24 July 2006.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill authorises the construction and operation of a single track railway line, with dynamic passing loops, which will run from the end of the current Edinburgh Crossrail line at Newcraighall to Tweedbank in the Scottish Borders. The proposed line runs through Midlothian and the Scottish Borders closely following the route of the A7 road. Stations are to be built at:

• Shawfair (Midlothian)
• Eskbank (Midlothian)
• Newtongrange (Midlothian)
• Gorebridge (Midlothian)
• Stow (Scottish Borders)
• Galashiels (Scottish Borders)
• Tweedbank (Scottish Borders)

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill grants the promoter, and their successors, the powers to build the railway line as well as authorising the construction of other works associated with it. To this end the promoter is granted a power of compulsory purchase and the power to stop-up roads and footpaths where necessary.

Parliamentary consideration

The Preliminary Stage of the Bill took 21 months to complete. The main reason for this delay was a series of land referencing errors by the promoter. The promoter failed to notify a number of landowners, lessors or tenants of land that could be affected by the railway about their proposals at the start of the process. The Committee had to allow the same length of time for those people to lodge objections to the proposals as others, notified at the beginning of the process, had been given. This resulted in the Committee having to delay their work by several months. The Committee also raised concerns about inadequate consultation between the promoter and key stakeholders and the robustness of housing projections on which passenger forecasts were partly based.

The Preliminary Stage Report of the Waverley Railway (Scotland) Committee was not unanimously agreed. Christine May MSP published a minority Preliminary Stage Report which questioned the economic assessment of the railway, the likely cost of construction and why a phased construction of the line to Gorebridge, with the possibility of extension to Tweedbank, had not been considered.

The Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill Committee rejected all objections to the Bill during Consideration Stage. The Committee recommended in the Consideration Stage Report that a station be built at Stow, a move opposed by the Scottish Executive and promoters, and that the railway be built in its entirety to Tweedbank.

The Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill Committee revisited some of the issues it raised during its Preliminary Stage consideration. The Committee were satisfied that improvements in communication and further work had taken place to ensure that housing forecasts could be met.

The Bill was passed with all the Committee’s amendments accepted by Parliament.

Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 9
Introduced on: 29 September 2003
Introduced by: Ross Finnie (Executive Bill)
Passed: 5 May 2004
Royal Assent: 11 June 2004

2004 asp 6

Passage of the Bill

The Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 9] was introduced in the Parliament on 29 September 2003. Stage 1 began on 29 October 2003 with the Environment and Rural Development Committee as the lead committee. The Stage 1 (general principles) debate took place on 7 January 2004, and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 5 May 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill builds on an existing legislative framework, most notably the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and also Part 12 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. It deals with specific aspects of nature conservation, in three parts:

• the conservation of biodiversity: the intention is to emphasise biodiversity as both an essential resource for sustainable development and as a measure of success in delivering sustainability;
• the conservation and enhancement of natural heritage through an improved system for notifying and protecting Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs); and
• the protection of wildlife through enhancements to species protection measures.

Provisions of the Bill

Part 1 of the Bill will apply a new general biodiversity duty to all Scottish public bodies and office holders. It obliges public authorities to “further the conservation of biodiversity” in the course of exercising their functions. It also provides a statutory basis for a Scottish Biodiversity Strategy.

Part 2 of the Bill introduces a number of new proposals to improve the protection of SSSIs. These include:

• a requirement for Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) to specify operations on SSSI sites for which their consent is required;
• enhanced powers for Ministers to make Nature Conservation Orders (NCOs) to protect SSSIs;
• payments to land managers for positive management of SSSIs;
• new powers to make Land Management Orders to enforce management of an SSSI;
• enhanced compulsory purchase powers;
• power to make restoration orders to repair damage to an SSSI, and the power to impose increased penalties for damaging SSSIs; and
• a full right of appeal to the Scottish Land Court for land managers.

Part 3 of the Bill amends Part I (Wildlife) of the Wildlife and Countryside (1981) Act (c. 69). In doing so, it builds upon a variety of existing amendments to the 1981 Act, including, most recently, changes implemented by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 (asp 7). Schedule 6 of the Bill sets out amendments and repeals covering:

• offences involving recklessness;
• new controls on possession of wildlife specimens obtained illegally outside Britain;
• protection for capercaillie during the breeding season;
• enhanced protection for cetaceans and basking sharks;
• employers who “cause or permit” wildlife offences;
• extended controls on the use of snares;
• an offence of possession of specified pesticides without reasonable excuse; and
• new provisions setting out the powers of government Wildlife Inspectors.

Parliamentary consideration

The Environment and Rural Development Committee took evidence on the Bill between January and March 2004. Based on the evidence taken, the committee raised concerns regarding the following issues:

• development of clear and accessible guidance on existing nature conservation law, and making this publicly available;
• reconsideration of the definition of “natural heritage” to avoid confusion with definitions used in other Acts;
• inclusion of provisions relating to the control of non-native species;
• inclusion of enhanced references to geodiversity, and a specific offence provision relating to geodiversity crime; and
• due consideration for the practicalities of implementing a system of identification for snares.

The main changes in the Bill as passed are:

• replacement of the term “natural heritage” with the term “natural feature”;
• the prohibition of hybrid non-native plants and animals from being grown, released or allowed to escape;
• provision for SNH to produce a Scottish Fossil Code;
• inclusion of a statutory underpinning for Ramsar (wetland) sites; and
• inclusion of land owned by Her Majesty in her private capacity (e.g. Balmoral Estate).

Criminal Procedure (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 10
Introduced on: 7 October 2003
Introduced by: Cathy Jamieson (Executive Bill)
Passed: 28 April 2004
Royal Assent: 4 June 2004

2004 asp 5

Passage of the Bill

The Criminal Procedure (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 10] was introduced in the Parliament on 7 October 2003. The Justice 1 Committee, as lead committee, commenced taking Stage 1 oral evidence on the general principles of the Bill at its meeting on 26 November 2003. The Stage 1 debate took place on 25 February 2004 and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 28 April 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Scottish Executive initiated a review of the practices and procedures of the High Court in late 2001. The report of this review, ‘Improving Practice: 2002 Review of the Practices and Procedure of the High Court of Justiciary’ (also referred to as ‘the Bonomy Report’), was published in December 2002. It set out various recommendations, some - but not all - of which would require legislation.

The Executive consulted on the recommendations produced by the review and, in June 2003, published a White Paper (‘Modernising Justice in Scotland’) setting out its proposals for reform. This was followed by the introduction of the Bill, to amend the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.

The Executive stated that the Bill is a key part of the overall package of reform to High Court procedures set out in the White Paper and is intended to introduce greater certainty into High Court proceedings, helping to develop a more managed system with emphasis on better communication between prosecution and defence and earlier preparation by both parties.

Provisions of the Bill

Part 1 of the Bill provides for changes to court procedures in the High Court, including a new mandatory pre-trial procedural hearing (to be known as a ‘preliminary hearing’) and changes to how trial dates are set.

Part 2 of the Bill includes provisions for changes to statutory time limits applying to the prosecution of cases, for the extension of existing provisions allowing trials in the absence of the accused, and to add new measures in relation to obstructive witnesses. It includes provisions applying to High Court cases and to cases prosecuted in the sheriff courts under solemn procedure.

Part 3 of the Bill provides courts, in relation to both solemn and summary procedure cases, with the power to require as a condition of bail, electronic monitoring (‘tagging’) restricting a person’s movements. It also contains provision for prosecutors to have a right to be heard on certain applications relating to bail.

Part 4 of the Bill includes provisions relating to matters which should be dealt with during ‘first diets’ (an existing pre-trial procedural hearing held in sheriff court cases under solemn procedure); sentencing following a guilty plea; and the sentencing powers of a sheriff under solemn procedure

Parliamentary consideration

The Justice 1 Committee noted in its Stage 1 Report that, almost without exception, the aims of the Bill were welcomed in evidence to the Committee. However, various aspects of the Bill did give rise to substantial debate. These included the proposal to extend the ‘110-day rule’. This is the rule that, where an accused has been remanded in custody to await trial, the trial must start within 110 days of full committal. Although the Justice 1 Committee noted in its Stage 1 Report that it had reservations about the proposed change, a majority of its members concluded that the advantages of the new system being introduced justified the extension of the time limit. The proposed change to the 110-day rule was included in the Bill as passed.

The Bill as passed does, however, include a number of significant changes from the Bill as introduced. These include changes to the provisions on trial in absence of the accused. The Bill as introduced made provision for a solemn trial to proceed or be concluded in the absence of the accused, in circumstances where the accused has been properly cited to appear and the court considers that it is in the interests of justice to proceed. The Justice 1 Committee acknowledged, in its Stage 1 Report, the problems experienced by victims and witnesses where an accused fails to appear for trial. It stated that it saw some merit in allowing a trial to continue in the absence of the accused where all the evidence has been led, but rejected the proposal that an accused should be tried in absence from the outset. The Deputy Minister for Justice noted during the Stage 3 parliamentary debate, that the Executive had accepted that the provision should be changed to restrict it to cases where evidence against the accused has already been led. The Bill as passed restricts the provision to cases where evidence has already been led which ‘substantially implicates the accused’ in respect of an offence charged in the indictment.

Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 11
Introduced on: 28 October 2003
Introduced by: Peter Peacock (Executive Bill)
Passed: 1 April 2004
Royal Assent: 7 May 2004

2004 asp 4

Passage of the Bill

The Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 11] was introduced in the Parliament on 28 October 2003. Stage 1 commenced on 5 November 2003 with the Education Committee as the lead committee. The Stage 1 debate took place on 28 January 2004 and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 1 April 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill sets out a new framework for supporting children and young people with additional support needs. It is based on the changing policies and practices which have evolved since the current framework was set up under the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 as amended.

The Bill replaces the concept of Special Educational Needs with Additional Support Needs, which will include children and young people, who, for whatever reason require support to access and benefit from education.

The Bill promotes the integrated working of education, health and social work to combine support for children and young people. It also aims to increase the involvement of parents in decisions affecting their child’s education and to support the involvement of children and young people in their own learning. Furthermore the Bill aims to safeguard the rights of those with the most significant and enduring needs.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill replaces the Record of Needs process with a new Co-ordinated Support Plan (CSP) for children and young people who have enduring needs arising from complex or multiple factors and require support from more than one agency. It places duties on education authorities to identify and assess whether children and young people have additional support needs or require a Co-ordinated Support Plan. Education authorities will also have a duty to seek and take account of advice and information from other agencies as appropriate.

Further provisions include:

• A duty on education authorities to establish independent mediation services for the purpose of avoiding or resolving disputes.
• The establishment of Additional Support Needs Tribunals for Scotland which will hear cases on decisions to prepare or not to prepare a CSP, review or discontinue a CSP and against a CSP’s contents.
• The publication of a Code of Practice, which will provide guidance for education authorities and other agencies of their functions.

Parliamentary consideration

The Education Committee took evidence on the Bill between November and December 2003. Based on the evidence taken, the committee raised concern regarding the following issues:

• that there should be no lessening of the rights of children to have their additional support needs met
• the criteria of eligibility for a Co-ordinated Support Plan
• the number of pupils who currently have a Record of Needs but would not be eligible for a CSP
• the provision of support for children under the age of three
• the need to ensure that other agencies, as well as education authorities, comply with their duties under the Bill
• a need to tighten the provisions for assessment of eligibility for a CSP
• powers and issues that can be referred to the tribunals
• provision for advocacy
• the clarity, consultation and legal status of the proposed code of practice
• planning arrangements for post -school transitions.

The main changes in the Bill as passed are:

• a new section which gives Scottish Ministers the power to extend the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
• that Scottish Ministers must consult widely before publishing the code of practice, and that education authorities must comply with the code of practice.
• the provision of support for children under the age of three.
• advocacy on the face of the Bill - any child, young person or parent will be able to have an advocate present during any discussions with the education authority.

Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 12
Introduced on: 29 October 2003
Introduced by: Margaret Curran (Executive Bill)
Passed: 17 June 2004
Royal Assent: 26 July 2004

2004 asp 8

Passage of the Bill

The Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 12] was introduced in the Parliament on 29 October 2003. Stage 1 commenced on 19 November 2003 with the Communities Committee designated as the lead committee and the Justice 2 Committee and the Local Government and Transport Committee being designated as secondary committees. The Stage 1 debate took place on 10 March 2004 and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 17 June 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The primary objective of the Bill was to make provision for measures to tackle antisocial behaviour (ASB). The Bill followed the Scottish Executive’s consultation document ‘Putting Our Communities First: A Strategy for Tackling Anti-social behaviour’, in which the Scottish Executive stated its concern about the effect ASB was having on communities and set out a number of proposals to tackle the issue.

Provisions of the Bill

The Billmakes provision for a number of measures, including: the development of Antisocial Behaviour Strategies; extending the provision of Antisocial Behaviour Orders (ASBO) to those aged 12 to 15; provisions to allow an area to be designated for the dispersal of groups where there is a serious and persistent problem of ASB; provisions to close premises that have become a focus for ASB; provisions to tackle noise nuisance; provisions to tackle graffiti and other environmental issues; in relation to housing, provisions to introduce Antisocial Behaviour Notices and a compulsory registration scheme for private landlords; provisions for the introduction of Parenting Orders; and, the introduction of Fixed Penalty Notices for various forms of ASB.

Parliamentary consideration

Prior to its Stage 1 inquiry into the Bill, the Communities Committee undertook a pre-legislative inquiry into how antisocial behaviour was affecting communities. Members of the committee met with groups and individuals from communities in each of the eight electoral list regions. Members also went on fact-finding visits to a Shelter Scotland’s Families Project in Edinburgh and Polmont Young Offenders Institute. In addition it sought the views of communities and individuals regarding ASB and the Scottish Executive’s consultation, through a questionnaire.

The Communities Committee received evidence from a number of community organisations and interest groups as part of its Stage 1 inquiry. Whilst there was general agreement that there was a problem with ASB in some communities, there was debate concerning some aspects of the Bill, in particular the use of ASBOs for 12 to 15 year olds, dispersal of groups, the provisions to register private landlords and the use of Restriction of Liberty Orders (RLOs) utilising electronic monitoring for those under 16. An outline of views regarding all the proposals in the Bill can be obtained from the SPICe briefing 03/91 ‘Antisocial Behaviour (Scotland) Bill’.

There were several significant amendments to the Bill as it underwent its passage through Parliament, in the following areas:

Antisocial Behaviour Strategies

Further to the Bill as introduced, when local authorities and the corresponding Chief Constable are developing Antisocial Behaviour Strategies, they will be required to take note of a variety of issues including: the need to assess the types and extent of ASB occurring in the area; specify arrangements for consulting with community bodies and individuals (particularly young people) regarding what is happening in their area; specify the range of services available to young people to support efforts in tackling ASB; and specify the availability of services for victims and witnesses of ASB.

Dispersal of groups

The section giving Scottish Ministers the powers to direct those exercising powers on the use of those powers was removed at Stage 2. In addition, in order to assess the effectiveness of the provisions in the Bill concerning the dispersal of groups, Scottish Ministers are required to arrange for research to be undertaken with a report being laid before Parliament within three years of when the provisions come into force.

Registration of Private Landlords

The Bill as introduced proposed a discretionary registration scheme for private landlords. It was envisaged that a local authority would have the power to introduce such a scheme where there was a problem with ASB associated with the private rented sector. At Stage 2, Cathie Craigie MSP introduced amendments, subsequently agreed to, though amended further at Stage 3, which proposed a national compulsory scheme, operated by each local authority. This scheme will compel all private landlords to register themselves and each of their properties that they let out. Letting agents will also be required to register. Although not linked to property conditions or the wider tenant / landlord, a landlord or agent will be required to pass a ‘fit and proper person’ test to register. Failure to register will be an offence liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level five on the standard scale (£5,000). In addition the Bill allows for no rent to be payable by tenants in a situation where a landlord is not registered.

Fire Sprinklers in Residential Premises (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 13
Introduced on: 17 November 2003
Introduced by: Michael Matheson (Member’s Bill)
Withdrawn: 29 September 2004

Passage of the Bill

The Fire Sprinklers in Residential Premises (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 13] was introduced in the Parliament by Michael Matheson MSP on 17 November 2003. The proposal for the Bill was lodged in the Parliament on 12 September 2003 and had received 15 supporters by 13 October 2003, sufficient to allow the Bill to proceed. The Bill was referred to the Communities Committee as the lead committee on 17 December 2003. The Committee considered its approach to the Bill at its meeting of 17 December 2003 and took Stage 1 evidence at its meeting of 10 March 2004. The Committee formally ‘parked’ its consideration of the Bill at its meeting of 24 March 2004. Michael Matheson MSP withdrew the Bill on 29 September 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill would have required fire sprinkler systems to be fitted in all new sheltered housing complexes and existing buildings that were converted to sheltered housing as well as certain Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs). The purpose of these proposals was to prevent fire deaths and injuries in types of property at a high risk from fire.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill required that a fire sprinkler system be fitted into certain HMOs and in all new build sheltered housing, as well as homes converted into sheltered housing. The Bill would also have given Scottish Ministers the power to alter, by order, the categories of housing to which the provisions of the Bill applied.

The Bill would have required a building standards verifier to ensure that all new build or converted sheltered housing was fitted with a sprinkler system prior to issuing a completion certificate. It is an offence to occupy a building which does not have a completion certificate.

The Bill would have made it an offence for the owner of a house, or their agent, to knowingly give their permission for it to be used as an HMO without a fire sprinkler having been installed. This included houses that were intended to be used as an HMO but which were not yet occupied. Failure to abide by these requirements would have been an offence which, on summary conviction, would be punishable by a fine not exceeding £5000. Where both an agent and owner permitted a house without a sprinkler to be used as an HMO both would have been liable to prosecution.

Parliamentary consideration

The Bill was withdrawn by Michael Matheson prior to completion of Stage 1 consideration as he had secured a commitment from the Executive to amend Building Regulations to achieve much of what he was aiming to do through the Bill.

On 18 March 2004 the Deputy Communities Minister announced a consultation on changes to Building Regulations, requiring the installation of fire sprinklers in all new or converted residential care buildings, sheltered housing and high rise flats. The consultation closed on 26 July 2004 and was supported by the great majority of the 42 respondents, although some did not think it went far enough. The new requirements were included in the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (SSI 2004/406), which came into force on 1 May 2005.

Local Governance (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 14
Introduced on: 21 November 2003
Introduced by: Andy Kerr (Executive Bill)
Passed: 23 June 2004
Royal Assent: 29 July 2004

2004 asp 9

Passage of the Bill

The Local Governance (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 14] was introduced in the Parliament on the 21 November 2003. Stage 1 commenced on 2 December 2003 with the Local Government and Transport Committee acting as the lead committee and the Equal Opportunities, Finance and Subordinate Legislation Committees acting as secondary committees. The Stage 1 debate took place on 24 March 2004 and following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 23 June 2004 the Bill was passed.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The policy intention of the Bill is to augment the Scottish Executive’s wider local government modernisation agenda. The Bill makes changes to the way in which councillors are elected, reduces the age qualification for candidates standing for election, changes the way councillors are remunerated and introduces a one-off severance scheme. The Bill follows on from the McIntosh Commission report and the report of the Kerley working group. The Executive has established three working groups to assist in the process of implementing the provisions of the Bill covering: the single transferable vote; councillor’s remuneration; and widening access to council membership.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill contains a wide range of provisions including the following:

• The introduction of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) for council elections based on wards consisting of either three or four members
• Changing the minimum age for standing as a councillor from 21 to 18
• The repeal of legislation establishing a salary threshold for politically restricted posts within local authorities
• The amendment of legislation so that council employees have to resign on election as a councillor to their employing council, rather than on nomination as a candidate
• The reduction to three months of the period during which most former councillors are unable to take up employment with the council after their period of service as a councillor comes to an end
• The introduction of a new system of remuneration
• Provisions to allow for the creation of a Scottish Local Authorities Remuneration Committee which will recommend to Ministers on the details of the future remuneration scheme for councillors
• A one-off severance payment to councillors who decide not to stand at the next local government election
• Powers to introduce a pension scheme for councillors to allow future service to count for pension purposes.

Parliamentary consideration

A wide range of issues was raised during the Stage 1 scrutiny of the Bill, notably concerning the introduction of the single transferable vote for local government elections. In particular, the issue of whether the district magnitude of three to four members per ward should be increased to at least three to five members per ward (with two in exceptional cases) in order to provide a greater degree of proportionality whilst also taking account of specific conditions in some rural areas. Some witnesses argued that the introduction of STV would lead to a diminution of the councillor-ward link.

The de-coupling of local government elections from Scottish Parliament elections was considered, although subsequent amendments at Stages 2 and 3 to decouple the elections were ruled outwith the scope of the Bill. The Committee recommended that e-counting be adopted at the earliest possible opportunity and recommended the use of the ‘weighted inclusive Gregory’ method of counting once e-counting had been introduced. The Scottish Executive amended the Bill during its passage, on the Committee’s recommendation, in order to place the detail of the STV counting process into secondary legislation so that any future changes in the counting method could be introduced without the need for further primary legislation.

The Committee also considered that severance payments should vary according to councillors’ length of service, that the severance payments should include councillors who stand for election but are defeated and that an on-going resettlement scheme should be established for councillors. However amendments aiming to achieve these changes were not agreed during the passage of the Bill.

Breastfeeding etc. (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 15
Introduced on: 16 December 2003
Introduced by: Elaine Smith (Members Bill)
Passed: 18 November 2004
Royal Assent: 18 January 2005

2005 asp 1

Passage of the Bill

The Breastfeeding etc. (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 15] was introduced in the Parliament by Elaine Smith MSP on 16 December 2003 with the Health Committee designated as the lead committee. The Stage 1 debate took place on 23 September 2004 and following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 18 November 2004 the Bill was passed.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The aim of the bill was to make it an offence to prevent or stop a child under the age of 2 being fed milk in a public place or licensed premises, where the child is otherwise lawfully permitted to be. The bill also contained provisions for the support and promotion of breastfeeding.

Provision of the Bill

The Bill introduces a fine of up to £2,500 for a person who deliberately prevents or stops a person from bottle-feeding or breastfeeding a child in a public place. The Bill also amends the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978 to impose duties on Ministers to support and encourage mothers to breastfeed their children.

Parliamentary Consideration

The Health Committee received evidence as part of its Stage 1 enquiry from a number of organisations including breastfeeding groups, local authorities, the Crown Office and organisations representing the Scottish Police Force.

Amendments were proposed by Carolyn Leckie MSP both at Stage 2 and Stage 3 regarding the age limit of the child being fed milk. Proposals included removing the age limit completely or raising the age limit from 2 years to either 3, 4, or 5 years of age. Carolyn Leckie believed that having an upper age limit sent a negative message to mothers breastfeeding older children and as many children as possible being breastfeed should be included in the legislation. Arguments against the amendments included the possibility of the legislation being open to ridicule if no upper age limit was set. In terms of setting an age limit above two years, Elaine Smith MSP pointed out that the steering group she set up to develop the proposals for the Bill, had discussed this issue at great length and had eventually decided that age two was an appropriate upper age limit. Elaine Smith also maintained that an upper age limit of two in the Bill would not make it illegal for a woman to breast feed beyond two. The amendments were not agreed to.

No major changes to the bill were made on its progression through Parliament.

Budget (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 16
Introduced: 20 January 2004
Introduced by: Andy Kerr (Budget Bill)
Passed: 12 February 2004
Royal Assent: 23 March 2004

2004 asp 2

Passage of the Bill

The Scottish Budget process is designed to allow the Parliament's subject committee the opportunity to comment on the Executive's spending plans at several points during the year prior to the annual budget being agreed. The process is divided into three distinct stages. Stage one (between March and June) allows subject committees the chance to look strategically at a high level overview of the Executive's spending plans. Stage two of the process (September to December) allows committees to comment on firmer Executive spending plans and at this stage the Finance Committee can propose an alternative budget. Stage 3 (January to February) provides Parliamentary authority for spending in Scotland for the following financial year via passage of the Budget Bill. Given the pre-legislative scrutiny, the time allocated to the passage of the Budget (Scotland) Bill is truncated. The Bill was introduced on 20 January 2004, with the Stage 1 debate on 29 January 2004. The Finance Committee considered it at Stage 2 on 10 February 2004 and the Bill was passed without division by the Parliament on 12 February 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The passage of the Bill is the final stage in the annual budget process and gives parliamentary authority for spending in Scotland for financial year 2004/5. The budget process is intended to allow the Parliament’s subject committees the opportunity to comment on the Executive’s spending plans at several points during the year prior to the annual budget being agreed. The expectation is that the subject committees should have an active role in scrutinising and making recommendations on spending priorities. Because of the Scottish General Election in May 2003, Stage 1 of the budget process was foregone and consideration of the budget began at Stage 2.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill will authorise over £21.7 billion of cash expenditure by the Scottish Executive and its associated bodies, other organisations whose core funding is centrally provided (e.g. local authorities and health boards), the Forestry Commissioners, the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body and Audit Scotland.

Parliamentary consideration

At the Stage 2 discussion in the Finance Committee the need for consistent multi-year data was emphasised so that valid long term comparisons could be made.

Edinburgh Tram (Line One) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 17
Introduced on: 29 January 2005
Introduced by: The City of Edinburgh Council (Private Bill)
Passed: 29 March 2006
Royal Assent: 8 May 2006

2006 asp 7

Passage of the Bill

The Edinburgh Tram (Line One) Bill [SP Bill 17] was introduced in the Parliament on 29 January 2004. The 60 day period for objections ended on 29 March 2004, resulting in 206 admissible objections. The Edinburgh Tram (Line One) Bill Committee was established and met for the first time on 30 June 2004. The Committee published its Preliminary Stage Report on 16 February 2005, which was debated by the Parliament on 2 March 2005. On 3 March 2005 the Parliament passed a financial resolution on the Bill. The Committee then commenced the Consideration Stage of the Bill, which resulted in the publication of its Consideration Stage Report on 1 March 2006. The Bill was passed following the Final Stage debate held on 29 March 2006.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill authorises the construction and operation of a circular tram line which will loop around an area of central and northern Edinburgh. The line will run from St Andrews Square, along Leith Walk, west to Granton, south to Haymarket and west along Shandwick Place and Princes Street back to St Andrews Square.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill grants the promoter, and their successors, the powers to build the tram line as well as authorising the construction of other works associated with the tramway. To this end the promoter is granted a power of compulsory purchase and the power to stop-up roads and footpaths where necessary. The Bill also grants Scottish ministers new powers to require buildings near the tram line to be specially insulated and allowing them to establish a penalty fares regime.

Parliamentary consideration

Although raising some minor concerns, particularly regarding the funding for the construction of the tramline, projected patronage and the scale of the benefits that the tram would bring, the Committee and Parliament agreed the general principles of the Bill at the Preliminary Stage. The Committee did not uphold any of the remaining objections at the Consideration Stage, although they did express concern about the amalgamation of the two proposed tram lines into one line running from Edinburgh Airport to Ocean Terminal, due to a lack of funding to develop the full tram network.

Edinburgh Tram (Line Two) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 18
Introduced on: 29 January 2004
Introduced by: The City of Edinburgh Council (Private Bill)
Passed: 22 March 2006
Royal Assent: 27 April 2006

2006 asp 6

Passage of the Bill

The Edinburgh Tram (Line Two) Bill [SP Bill 18] was introduced in the Parliament on 29 January 2004. The 60 day period for objections ended on 29 March 2004, resulting in 206 admissible objections. The Edinburgh Tram (Line Two) Bill Committee was established and met for the first time on 29 June 2004. The Committee published its Preliminary Stage Report on 9 February 2005, which was debated by the Parliament on 23 February 2005. On 3 March 2005 the Parliament passed a financial resolution on the Bill. The Committee then commenced the Consideration Stage of the Bill, which resulted in the publication of its Consideration Stage Report on 21 December 2005. The Bill was passed following the Final Stage debate held on 22 March 2006. The Bill received Royal Assent on 27 April 2006.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill authorises the construction and operation of a tram line which will run from central Edinburgh to the western outskirts of the city. The line will run in a westerly direction from St Andrews Square, along Princes Street, past Haymarket railway station to South Gyle, north to the Gogar roundabout and then northwest to Edinburgh Airport. A stand alone shuttle service would run between the Airport and Newbridge.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill grants the promoter, and their successors, the powers to build the tram line as well as authorising the construction of other works associated with the tramway. To this end the promoter is granted a power of compulsory purchase and the power to stop-up roads and footpaths where necessary. The Bill also grants Scottish ministers new powers to require buildings near the tram line to be specially insulated and allowing them to establish a penalty fares regime.

Parliamentary consideration

Although raising some minor concerns, particularly regarding a possible lack of funding for the scheme and the predicted level of patronage, the Committee recommended that the Parliament agree the general principles of the Bill at the Preliminary Stage. The Committee did not uphold any of the remaining objections at the Consideration Stage, although they did express concern about the amalgamation of the two proposed tram lines into one line running from Edinburgh Airport to Ocean Terminal, due to a lack of funding to develop the full tram network.

Tenements (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 19
Introduced on: 30 January 2004
Introduced by: Margaret Curran (Executive Bill)
Passed: 16 September 2004
Royal Assent: 22 October 2004

2004 asp 11

Passage of the Bill

The Tenements (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 19] was introduced in the Parliament on 30 January 2004. The Justice 2 Committee, as the lead committee, commenced taking Stage 1 oral evidence on the general principles of the Bill at its meeting on 24 February 2004. The Stage 1 debate took place on 3 June 2004 and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 16 September 2004.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The Bill is the final item in the Scottish Executive’s legislative programme of property law reform based on recommendations of the Scottish Law Commission. Earlier bills led to the Abolition of Feudal Tenure etc (Scotland) Act 2000 and the Title Conditions (Scotland) Act 2003. All three pieces of legislation are expected to be fully commenced on 28 November 2004.

The Bill has two main aims:

• to clarify and re-state the common law rules which demarcate
• ownership of the various parts of the tenement, removing a number of anomalies and uncertainties in the existing law
• to provide a statutory system of management for tenements (referred to in the Bill as the ‘Tenement Management Scheme’) ensuring that the owners of every tenement will have a mechanism to reach decisions on important matters such as repairs

The Bill’s overall policy objective is to facilitate the carrying out of outstanding necessary repairs to tenements.

Provisions of the Bill

Sections 1–3 of the Bill clarify the rules which demarcate ownership of the different parts of a tenement.

Section 4 of the Bill determines the circumstances when the Tenement

Management Scheme applies and the Schedule to the Bill lays out the rules of the Scheme.

The Bill also covers a range of other matters relating to tenements including duties of ‘support’ and ‘shelter’ owed by flat owners to one another (ss 7–10), the obligation on an owner to insure his or her flat (s 15), the continuing liability of outgoing owners for repairs to a tenement building (ss 11–13), access to flats by other flat owners for maintenance purposes (s 14), and demolition and abandonment of tenement buildings (ss 16 – 20).

Parliamentary consideration

The Justice 2 Committee noted in its Stage 1 Report that evidence given to it was consistent with the Executive's evidence that there is widespread support for the aims of the Bill. The issues debated in their evidence were points of detail.

The most contentious part of the Bill was section 11 which, in the Bill as introduced, provided that where there are unpaid debts when a tenement is sold, the buyer should become severally liable with the previous owner. In its

Stage 1 Report the Committee concluded this provision was “very unfair to the purchaser”,(Justice 2 Committee ‘Stage 1 Report on Tenements (Scotland) Bill’, para 43) as he or she might be exposed to large and unexpected bills for repair work if a seller did not disclose the existence of such a liability and then disappeared without trace.

In response to the Committee’s concerns, the Executive moved amendments at Stage 3 to allow any owner in a tenement to register a notice in the property registers to make it public that works have been or may be carried out to the tenement. Under the new provisions, if there is no notice, the incoming purchaser will not be liable for the costs of any work carried out before he or she became an owner.

Prohibition of Smoking in Regulated Areas (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 20
Introduced on: 3 February 2004
Introduced by: Stewart Maxwell (Member’s Bill)
Withdrawn: 21 July 2005

Passage of the Bill

The Prohibition of Smoking in Regulated Areas (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 20] was introduced in the Parliament on 3 February 2004. Stage 1 commenced on 8 June 2004 with the Health Committee as the lead committee. The stage 1 debate did not take place and the Bill was withdrawn by the Member in charge of the Bill, Stewart Maxwell on 21 July 2005.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

This Member’s Bill was intended to ban smoking in public places where food is served. It followed and refined a proposal for a bill made by Kenneth Gibson MSP, in Session 1, to “regulate smoking in enclosed premises open to the public where food is sold and consumed.”

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill defined a ‘regulated area’ as one in which food is served, or will be served within the following 5 days. It would be an offence to smoke in a regulated area, to permit smoking in a regulated area and to fail to display signs inside and outside regulated areas. These offences would have carried a penalty of a fine of up to £1,000 and offences relating to the Bill, except the offence of smoking in a regulated area, would apply to bodies corporate and partnerships as well as to individuals.

Parliamentary consideration

In its Stage 1 Report on the Bill, published on 11 January 2005, a majority of Committee members were of the view that the ban would have a positive impact on public health and that a voluntary approach to tobacco control would not ensure the same outcome. A majority of members supported the general principles of the Bill.

However, on 16 December 2004, prior to the Committee’s Stage 1 report, the Executive introduced the Smoking, Health and Social Care Bill [SP Bill 33]. This Bill completed Stage 1 by 29 April 2005 and was passed on 30 June 2005 (2005 asp 13).

The Prohibition of Smoking in Regulated Areas Bill was withdrawn on 21 July 2005

Emergency Workers (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 21
Introduced on: 22 March 2004
Introduced by: Andy Kerr (Executive Bill)
Passed: 22 December 2004
Royal Assent: 1 February 2005

2005 asp 2

Passage of the Bill

The Emergency Workers (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 21] was introduced in the Parliament on 22 March 2004. The Justice 1 Committee, as lead committee, commenced taking Stage 1 oral evidence on the general principles of the Bill at its meeting on 5 May 2004. The Stage 1 debate took place on 30 September 2004 and following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 22 December 2004 the Bill was passed.

Objective of the Bill

The Policy Memorandum stated that the “Bill’s policy objective is to create a specific offence of attacking an emergency worker, or someone assisting an emergency worker, who is responding to emergency circumstances” (para 2). It went on to state that the Bill is part of a wider drive against antisocial behaviour, as well as being part of a wider package of measures aimed at protecting public service workers.

Provisions of the Bill as introduced

The Bill as introduced made provision for a statutory offence where someone assaults, obstructs or hinders an emergency worker, or any other person assisting such a worker, whilst the emergency worker is responding to emergency circumstances. Definitions of ‘emergency worker’ and ‘emergency circumstances’ were included in the Bill. The protection proposed in the Bill was in addition to existing common law and statutory offences.

In addition, the Bill as introduced made provision for a further statutory offence applying within certain parts of a hospital. Under this, it would be an offence to assault, obstruct or hinder particular types of emergency worker, or any person assisting such a worker, within hospital accident and emergency premises. It would not require any evidence that the worker was responding to emergency circumstances. The Explanatory Notes stated that there is “no provision requiring that emergency circumstances exist since emergency circumstances may be assumed to exist or be imminent in accident and emergency premises at all times” (para 15). For the purposes of this offence, the definition of emergency worker was restricted to doctors, nurses, midwives and ambulance staff.

Parliamentary consideration

There was a great deal of support for the view that more should be done to provide emergency and other workers with better protection from being attacked or impeded. However, there was also considerable debate about: (a) whether or not legislation creating new criminal offences is required given the coverage of existing offences; and (b) who should be protected by any new offences and in what circumstances.

The Justice 1 Committee’s Stage 1 Report, whilst indicating the committee’s majority support for the general principles of the Bill, also noted that the committee would expect significant changes to be made to the Bill at Stage 2. Areas in need of amendment were stated to include: (a) the definition of emergency circumstances and how this restricts coverage of the Bill; (b) the categories of worker covered by the Bill; and (c) the restriction of the additional offence to accident and emergency premises. Similar points were raised during the Stage 1 plenary debate at which the Parliament agreed the general principles of the Bill

Following Stage 1, a Scottish Executive news release (18 November 2004) stated that it had taken account of the views expressed by the Justice 1 Committee and had, therefore, lodged amendments with the aim of:

“(…) extending the protection offered by the Bill to ensure that the police, fire and ambulance workers as well as medical staff in hospitals are covered whenever they are on duty, as well as when they are actually dealing with emergencies”.

As a result of Executive amendments agreed at Stage 2, the circumstances in relation to which a person may be prosecuted for an offence under the Bill, without the need to show that an emergency worker was responding to emergency circumstances, were substantially expanded. A new section, applying to police, fire and ambulance workers, provides that it is an offence to assault, obstruct or hinder a worker acting in such a capacity. There is no requirement that the worker is responding to emergency circumstances. In addition, the offence applying to hospital accident and emergency premises was expanded to all parts of a hospital.

Other significant amendments agreed at Stage 2 included some extension to the categories of worker covered by the Bill (e.g. including social workers whilst involved in certain types of work).

The Bill was passed on 22 December 2004 following some more modest amendment at Stage 3.

School Education (Ministerial Powers and Independent Schools) (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 22
Introduced on: 29 March 2004
Introduced by: Peter Peacock (Executive Bill)
Passed: 6 October 2004
Royal Assent: 12 November 2004

2004 asp 12

Passage of the Bill

The School Education (Ministerial Powers and Independent Schools) (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 22] was introduced on 29 March 2004 and the Education Committee designated lead Committee. The Committee considered its approach on 24 March 2004. It took evidence at Stage 1 on 5 and 12 May 2004. The Committee reported on the general principles on 15 June 2004 7th Report 2004 SP Paper 177 and the Stage 1 debate was held on 24 June 2004. Stage 2 amendments were considered on 15 September 2004. The Stage 3 debate was held on 6 October 2004 following which the Bill was passed.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The objective of the Bill is to give Scottish Ministers proportionate powers that will assist them to meet their statutory duty, as established by the Standards in Scotland’s Schools Act 2000, to endeavour to secure improvement in the quality of school education in Scotland.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill as passed gives new powers of ministerial intervention where schools or education authorities fail to implement the recommendations of a report by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education (HMIE). HMIE can refer the education authority or managers of grant-aided schools to Ministers, if it feels satisfactory action has not been taken to secure improvement either at school or education authority level.

A two stage intervention process allows those concerned to respond to a preliminary notice. If Ministers are not satisfied with this response then an enforcement direction will be issued which sets out various actions that an education authority or manager of grant aided school should comply with. It is expected that this power will be used relatively rarely.

In addition, the Bill also updates the registration and monitoring system for independent schools. This is to ensure the provisions, some of which date from the 1950s, are consistent with recent developments and allow for quick action to be taken by Ministers, where necessary, to address child welfare. All independent schools must register with Scottish Ministers through the Registrar of Independent Schools. The Bill tightens up the registration procedures and extends reasons for denying registration. The notice of complaint procedure is also strengthened giving Ministers three new options to act in this area including acting without serving a notice of complaint where urgent action is required.

Parliamentary consideration

During Stage 1 the Committee took oral evidence over two meetings from five panels of witnesses, including representatives of head teachers, local government and independent schools.

One issue arising at Stage 1 was whether the suggested intervention powers were necessary. However, in its Stage 1 report, the Committee considered that: “the Bill provides a legal endpoint to the HMIE process and therefore could make a contribution to the Scottish Executive's educational improvement agenda.” The Committee agreed to the general principles of the Bill in its report.

At stage 2 the Bill was amended to include a requirement to consider the seriousness of the failure before using the proposed ministerial powers of intervention. In relation to independent schools, amendments were made concerning those who were to be informed of decisions relating to registration decisions. A few minor amendments were agreed to at Stage 3.

Water Services etc. (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 23
Introduced on: 11 June 2004
Introduced by: Ross Finnie (Executive Bill)
Passed: 9 February 2005
Royal Assent: 17 March 2005

2005 asp 3

Passage of the Bill

The Water Services etc. (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 23] was introduced in the Parliament on 11 June 2004. Stage 1 commenced on 16 June with the Environment and Rural Development Committee as the lead committee. The Stage 1 debate took place on 17 November 2004 and the Bill was passed following the Stage 3 parliamentary debate on 9 February 2005.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The main elements of the Bill focus on restructuring the economic water regulator in Scotland, introducing a series of provisions relating to competition in the water industry in Scotland, and establishing a statutory basis for remediation of coal mine water pollution.

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill seeks to establish a new corporate body, the Water Industry Commission, comprising 3-5 ordinary members and a Chief Executive to take on the functions of the Water Industry Commissioner. These functions include promoting the best interests of the customers of Scottish Water and customers of any other companies which may be licensed to sell water to non-domestic customers. The Bill will amend and strengthen the role of the Water Customer Consultation Panels.

The Bill will prohibit companies other than Scottish Water from using the public water and sewerage systems (which would be known as “common carriage”). The Bill will prohibit water and sewerage retail competition to the domestic sector, but will allow for such competition in the non-domestic sector, subject to a licensing regime overseen by the new Water Industry Commission. In addition Ministers will have powers under the Bill to issue Codes of Practice on sewerage nuisance. This is particularly to help deal with the problem of sewage odour.

Finally, the Bill will give the Coal Authority powers to prevent or mitigate pollution relating to water from coal mines, and further gives the Authority the power to access property to deal with such issues, where agreement on access cannot be reached.

Parliamentary consideration

During Parliamentary consideration, the Bill was amended to give new powers and duties to Water Customer Consultation Panels, including a new power for the Convenor of the panels to investigate customer complaints. Another amendment to the Bill gives Scottish Ministers the power to make a code of practice on nuisance caused by odours emanating from sewerage works. The code would contain best practice for tackling sewerage odours and would apply to Scottish Water (or anyone acting on their behalf). Monitoring compliance with the code would be the responsibility of Local Authorities, who would also have powers to ensure compliance where it could be proved that the code had been breached.

Fire (Scotland) Bill

Bill Number: SP Bill 24
Introduced on: 28 June 2004
Introduced by: Cathy Jamieson (Executive Bill)
Passed: 23 February 2005
Royal Assent: 1 April 2005

2005 asp 5

Passage of the Bill

The Fire (Scotland) Bill [SP Bill 24] was introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 28 June 2004. The lead committee for the Bill was the Justice 2 Committee which held a preliminary discussion on the provisions contained within the Bill on 29 June 2004. The Stage 1 Report produced by the Committee was published on 11 November 2004 and the Stage 1 debate took place in the Parliament on 18 November 2004.

At its meetings on 8 February 2005 and 22 February 2005, the Subordinate Legislation Committee considered changes to the delegated powers provisions in the Fire (Scotland) Bill as amended at stage 2. The Committee is required to report to the Parliament on these provisions under Rule 9.7.9 of Standing Orders. As a result of recommendations by the Subordinate Legislation Committee the order-making powers of Scottish Ministers in relation to creating further categories of persons who may cause temporary suspension of fire safety duties (S55) and to make regulations to modify the application of Part 3 (Fire Safety) to premises that become ‘relevant premises’ (S72) were changed from negative to affirmative resolution procedure. In addition, the power of Scottish Ministers to make regulations specifying cases where the due diligence defence would not apply (S67) was removed and added instead to the face of the Bill. A Report was published by the Subordinate Legislation Committee on 23 February 2005. The Stage 3 debate took place in the Parliament on the same day. The Bill was passed on 23 February 2005.

Purpose and objectives of the Bill

The main policy objectives of the Bill are as follows:

• to define the role of a modern fire and rescue service
• to ensure that fire and rescue authorities have clear national and local priorities and objectives
• to improve the protection offered to communities
• to revise fire safety legislation

Provisions of the Bill

The Bill covers various aspects of the fire and rescue services and is in 5 parts:

Part 1 – Fire and Rescue Authorities:
Part 2 – Fire and Rescue Services:
Part 3 – Fire Safety
Part 4 – Miscellaneous
Part 5 - General

The Bill repeals and re-enacts many of the provisions of the Fire Services Act 1947 (c.41) as they currently apply in Scotland.

Parliamentary consideration

Consultation on the modernisation of Fire and Rescue Services in Scotland commenced in April 2002 with the launch of the first comprehensive policy proposals for the Service in many years. In October 2003, the Scottish Ministers launched a consultation paper on their legislative proposals for the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service – The Scottish Fire and Rescue Services: Proposals for Legislation. Following the launch of the consultation paper on 1 October 2003, the proposals were debated in the Scottish Parliament on 8 October 2003. In general, the responses received to the policy paper welcomed the proposals.

The Justice 2 Committee did raise certain concerns in their scrutiny of the Bill at Stage 1 and the main concerns and the Executive’s response are noted below.

The Justice 1 Committee sought clarification on the line of reporting responsibility from the Firemaster to the Fire Authority. Having considered this matter, the Executive lodged an amendment at Stage 2 to clarify the role of the Chief Officer and accountability arrangements. With regard to amalgamation schemes in Part 1 of the Bill, the Executive was happy to provide assurances that any requirement for consultation would be comprehensive and transparent and would include all interested parties.

After consideration, the Executive brought forward other amendments at stage 2 which covered issues such as Firefighting at Sea; changing the procedure for making Amalgamation Orders from negative to affirmative; and making the Chief Fire Officer responsible to his Fire and Rescue Authority for the discharge of his functions.