Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mhairi Black
I thank the Minister for confirming that there is no legal basis for his assertion on the timing of a future referendum. Given that it was also agreed cross-party that nothing in the Smith commission prevents Scotland from becoming an independent country in the future, can he tell us whose decision is it whether Scotland has another referendum?
Mr Speaker
Order. The question must have some relevance. The first question got through, but you were trying to push your luck the second time. We cannot do that. The question must be relevant. Sorry about that. We had better move on.
Douglas Ross (Moray) (Con) [V]
The extension of the furlough scheme demonstrated again how the UK Government continue to support jobs in all four nations of the United Kingdom, and we need that support and joint working to continue following the positive news about a potential covid-19 vaccine. Will the Secretary of State outline the work done between the Scottish Government and the UK Government to ensure that there is a seamless roll-out of this vaccine that has given us so much hope here in Scotland and across the UK.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Iain Stewart)
An effective response to covid-19 does indeed need to be a co-ordinated response across the UK. On 25 September, the UK Government and the three devolved Administrations published a joint statement on our collective approach to responding to covid-19. There are very regular meetings at both ministerial and officials levels.
Jeff Smith
What is the Minister’s understanding of the application of the furlough scheme in Scotland and the other nations of the UK, given that Scotland is operating under a different tier system and different lockdown restrictions?
Iain Stewart
The hon. Lady raises an important point. As I said in my initial answer, there are very regular discussions between all Government Departments and devolved Administrations at many levels—be that in Health, Transport or Education. I think that there is a widespread understanding of the need to balance UK-wide interventions with allowing local flexibilities where circumstances dictate.
Allan Dorans [V]
Will the Minister confirm or deny that taxpayers’ money is being used to employ consultants with the sole purpose of producing and promoting negative propaganda to encounter the increasingly successful campaign for Scottish independence? Is that not to the detriment of co-operation between the nations?
Iain Stewart
Forgive me, Mr Speaker, but I am not quite sure what that has got to do with the response to coronavirus.
Ian Murray (Edinburgh South) (Lab)
I join the Secretary of State in recognising that it is the 11th day of the 11th month, lest we forget those who gave their lives so that we could live freely today. We will always remember them.
I am disappointed that the Secretary of State did not congratulate President-elect Joe Biden on his wonderful election in America. Given that in a recent poll 75% of Scots said that they would vote for Joe Biden, they have eventually got the Government they would have voted for.
The announcement this week of a potential covid vaccine is incredibly positive. While it certainly does not mean, of course, that we have reached the end of this crisis, it does perhaps signal some hope for the public. If the vaccine is approved, the country will face an unprecedented logistical challenge. If mass vaccination is to be done successfully, we will need all levels of government working together. However, a poll just yesterday found that two thirds of Scots were dissatisfied that the Scottish and UK Governments do not work together and a majority wanted closer co-operation. So can the Minister inform the House: what work are the UK and Scottish Governments undertaking together to build an infrastructure that will be able to distribute and administer any future vaccines to everyone?
Iain Stewart
The hon. Gentleman’s question would have greater potency if furlough was indeed the only scheme that was available, but a wide range of support is available for businesses and individuals across the UK, including bounce back loans, tax deferrals, mortgage holidays and the like. In addition, the Chancellor has provided to the Scottish Government unprecedented levels of support, going up by an additional £1 billion. It is up to the Scottish Government, if they wish to provide additional support over and above the UK-wide schemes, to ensure that they have the resources to do so.
Mr Speaker
Order. Can I just say that I am very concerned that the question was a substantive question that was within this grouping? The problem is that the grouping is not good, but it was the Government who put the grouping together. So I think the Minister ought to try to see if he could answer the question from Allan Dorans, because it is within that section.
Iain Stewart
If I remember the question correctly, it was, “Are we spending taxpayers’ money on fighting the independence referendum?” My answer to that is that we do not wish another independence referendum. The last thing that the people of Scotland need, and businesses and jobs in Scotland need, is the uncertainty that another independence referendum would create.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
John Howell (Henley) (Con)
Mr Speaker
This question, No. 16, has been withdrawn, so the substantive question will be from David Mundell. Secretary of State to answer.
The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr Alister Jack)
Am I answering David Mundell’s question?
Mr Speaker
Let us carry on then. If the Secretary of State does not have the answer, it is easy—I call David Mundell.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con) [V]
There are many different ways that the Government can provide economic support to Scottish businesses during covid-19. For the Scotch whisky industry, the biggest help in retaining jobs and supporting its businesses would be for the Government to resolve the US tariffs dispute, rather than escalate it by applying further retaliatory tariffs. Can my right hon. Friend update the House on progress on this vital issue for Scottish businesses and jobs?
Mr Speaker
Order. Secretary of State, the question is on the Order Paper, and I can assure him it is not about transport. Answer the question from David Mundell.
The Prime Minister
Absolutely; I thank my hon. Friend. I can tell him that the landmark Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill receives Royal Assent today, thanks to this House, paving the way for the fulfilling of our manifesto commitment to end free movement and have a new, fair points-based immigration system—one of the advantages of leaving the European Union that the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer) would of course like to reverse.
Ian Blackford (Ross, Skye and Lochaber) (SNP) [V]
May I associate myself with the remarks of the Prime Minister on the death of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks? This being Armistice Day, we commemorate the day 102 years ago on the eleventh hour of the eleventh month when the guns fell silent and all those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice in conflict since then. I also want to send our best wishes to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris on winning the election in north America. I look forward to the leadership they will show on the issues of climate change and fighting back against covid among other things.
The figures published by the Office for National Statistics yesterday demonstrate what the SNP has been warning about for months: that the UK faces a growing Tory unemployment crisis. It is now beyond doubt that the Chancellor’s last-minute furlough U-turn came far too late for thousands who have already lost their jobs as a result of Tory cuts, delays and dither. UK unemployment has now risen to 4.8%. Redundancies are at a record high and nearly 800,000 fewer people are in employment. To support those who have lost their incomes, will the Prime Minister now commit to making the £20 uplift to universal credit permanent and to extending it to legacy benefits, so that no one—no one, Prime Minister—is left behind?
The Prime Minister
Our armed services simply could not function without the support of their families, and I thank my hon. Friend for what he is doing to raise this issue and for the comprehensive piece of research that he refers to. We are making good progress on increasing childcare provision for armed services families and on our support for employment of partners of members of the armed services.
Mr Speaker
In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for a few minutes.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 years, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Duguid)
An effective response to covid-19 does indeed need to be a co-ordinated response across the UK. On 25 September, the UK Government and the three devolved Administrations published a joint statement on our collective approach to responding to covid-19. We reaffirmed our shared commitment to suppressing the virus to the lowest possible level and keeping it there while we strive to return life to as normal as possible for as many people and businesses as possible.
The Prime Minister
There is abundant brownfield space across the whole UK, and I speak as someone who used to be the planning authority for London, and I know whereof I speak. The opportunity is there. In many cases, the restrictions are caused by cumbersome planning procedures, but they are also caused by the inability of young people to get the mortgages that they want to buy the homes that they want. That is why we are bringing forward fixed-rate mortgages for 95% of the value of a property to help young people on to the property ladder. We are going to turn generation rent into generation buy.
Mr Speaker
In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for four minutes.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 years, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Jack
First, I congratulate the hon. Gentleman and his partner on the birth of their baby daughter, Zola, which is why he is currently on paternity leave.
I hope that I face even questions such as that from the hon. Gentleman for some time to come, because he is honourable, which is a lot more than can be said for many in his party—the hard left of his party—who have sought to smear and undermine him in recent days. In answer to his question, we absolutely do want a deal. We are in serious negotiations again this week because we want to get a deal, and that is our intention, but the withdrawal agreement was written on the basis that subsequent agreements could be reached through the Joint Committee, and that Joint Committee process is ongoing and we are committed to it. None the less, in the event that it cannot deal with any adverse implications for the Good Friday agreement, it is important that we have a position that creates a safety net to uphold our commitments to the members of Northern Ireland.
Ian Murray
I am very grateful to the Secretary of State for his kind words about Zola, and if his Government could legislate for a minimum of six hours’ sleep for new parents, I certainly would be the first person in the Aye Lobby to support them.
The Secretary of State’s Conservative colleague and prominent constitutional expert, Adam Tomkins MSP, his own—now resigned—most senior Government lawyer and many on his own Back Benches disagree with him. He must surely realise that the UK Government’s recklessness only benefits those who want to break up the UK and the consequences of breaking up the UK would be dire for all of our constituents. As has already been mentioned, the Scottish Government’s own figures last week showed that the UK dividend to Scotland is an extra £15 billion a year—the entire budget of the Scottish NHS. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the focus of both the Scottish and UK Governments must be to protect public health, invest in our economy, and secure jobs and not to continue with this endless paralysing constitutional division?
The Prime Minister
I congratulate my hon. Friend on the continual support he gives to the people of Gibraltar and to Gibraltar. I can assure him that the sovereignty of Gibraltar is inviolable, and I join him, as I hope all Members join him, in wishing the people of Gibraltar a very happy national day on Thursday.
Mr Speaker
We now come to the Leader of the Opposition, with the first of six questions.
Keir Starmer (Holborn and St Pancras) (Lab)
Yesterday, I spoke to a mum who lives in London. She has a four-year-old daughter, who had a very high temperature yesterday morning. She phoned 111, and was told to get a test. She tried to book, and was told the nearest was Romford. That was 9 o’clock in the morning. She explored that, but there were no tests there. She was then told Haywards Heath, halfway to Brighton—on exploration, no tests there. By lunch time, this mum was told the nearest place was Telford or Inverness. A slot became available in Lee Valley in the afternoon—one slot—but, unfortunately, that was being offered across the country, including to people in Manchester, and it was impossible to book. At 9 o’clock last night, she was told the nearest centre was Swansea. This is, frankly, ridiculous. Who does the Prime Minister think is responsible for this?
The Prime Minister
The answer is that yes, indeed, we will press on with the Bill, because I believe that the right hon. Gentleman’s attacks on it are totally illogical. It actually represents a substantial transfer of powers and of sovereignty to Scotland, to Wales, to Northern—it is a massive devolutionary act. What it also does is—I believe this is common ground across the Dispatch Box—[Interruption.] It also ensures the integrity of the UK internal market. He speaks of a transfer of powers to the UK Government. On the contrary, what he would do is transfer powers back to Brussels not just over competition and state aid but, of course, over fisheries too. That is the policy of the Scottish nationalist party, and it would be a disaster for our country. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
I am sure that the leader of the SNP would like to withdraw that last comment about being a liar. No hon. Member would do that. Please withdraw it.
Ian Blackford
Mr Speaker, it is on the face of the Bill that the Government of the UK are going to trample over devolution. That is not a lie.
Mr Speaker
Mr Blackford, you are a great Member of this House. You do the right things by this House, and I have accepted that you have withdrawn it.
Ian Levy (Blyth Valley) (Con)
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(4 years ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Jack
I have already given the answer on the first point. On the messaging, the messaging in Scotland is different to that in England, which is fine, but the “stay alert” message in England is that people should stay at home and work from home if they can work from home, but if they cannot, they can go to work. That is very clear. In going to work, they stay alert, wash their hands and socially distance themselves—they do all those things. If Scottish Members of Parliament do not want to come back to be scrutinised or to scrutinise Ministers, that will be a matter for them, but at some point we will have to move to a stage where Parliament is operating on a virtual and covid-safe basis, and that is exactly as it should be.
Mr Speaker
I welcome the shadow Secretary of State for the first of his two questions from the Front Bench.
Ian Murray (Edinburgh South) (Lab)
That is very kind of you, Mr Speaker; thank you very much indeed.
The Secretary of State will be aware of the February outbreak of covid-19 at an international Nike conference in central Edinburgh. In a catastrophic error of judgment, the Scottish Government decided that the Scottish public would not be informed, despite that being contrary to Scottish public health legislation. The public could have helped with the tracing and used their own common sense, as the Prime Minister has said, to make choices about attending large events and gatherings. A BBC documentary reported that a lockdown then could have saved 2,000 Scottish lives. Will the Secretary of State tell the House whether the UK Government were informed; why the public were not told, given the subsequent disinfecting and closure of Nike outlets all over the UK; and how many UK lives could have been saved as a result?
Mr Jack
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. The Department for Education has been engaging closely with ministerial and official colleagues in Scotland to discuss a range of higher education areas that are affected by covid-19. I am also pleased to say that the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, my hon. Friend the Member for Moray (Douglas Ross), is meeting Universities Scotland’s funding policy group later this week.
Chris Elmore (Ogmore) (Lab)
Scotland’s 19 universities are not immune to the financial hardship caused by the pandemic. They currently face immediate in-year losses of £72 million, and Universities Scotland anticipates that 18 of Scotland’s 19 universities will go on to report deficits in this financial year. May I press the Secretary of State further on what work he will do as part of a UK Government working with the Scottish Government to ensure that any detrimental impact to universities across Scotland is dealt with and that universities are supported and helped in relation to the pandemic?
Dr James Davies [V]
Does the Secretary of State agree with Adam Marshall, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, has said:
“We need to see the whole of the UK moving together—the alternative for business is additional confusion and cost. Avoiding divergence for the sake of politics is important.”
Does the Secretary of State agree?
Mr Speaker
I do not know if the Secretary of State could hear that—if not, we will move on.
Douglas Ross
I do agree that as we come out of this pandemic we have to ensure that steps are taken to protect and restore people’s livelihoods, which are clearly at the forefront of everyone’s minds at the moment, because a strong economy is the best way to protect jobs and fund vital services that are required. I am certain that city and growth deals in Scotland and across the UK will play their part in helping to achieve this.
Mr Speaker
Sam Tarry has withdrawn, so we go to the substantive question from Jacob Young.
Neale Hanvey [V]
Despite the England-only designation of some PPE imports, the grassroots medical association EveryDoctor has been collating a range of data on PPE availability, and anecdotal evidence suggests that the Scottish Government’s system of procurement and distribution of PPE for Scotland’s NHS has been more efficient and effective from its perspective than that experienced by frontline medical staff in the English NHS. Can the Minister advise the House of what discussions he has had—
Douglas Ross
I have had regular discussions with the Scottish Government about procuring PPE. Of course, it was the Scottish Government who had a delivery into Prestwick airport of PPE that was not properly labelled, which sat in the airport unable to get out into the care homes to protect the people we needed it to get to. The four nations across the United Kingdom continue to prioritise this issue. It is important for our NHS workers, our careworkers and Scotland and the United Kingdom as a whole.
Keir Starmer
Again, the question was when would routine testing start, and the chief executive of Care England, who knows what he is talking about, gave evidence yesterday that it has not. [Interruption.] If the Prime Minister is disputing the evidence to the Select Committee, that is his own business. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. Secretary of State for Health, please. I do not mind you advising the Prime Minister, but you do not need to advise the Opposition during this. [Interruption.] Sorry, do you want to leave the Chamber? We are at maximum numbers. If you want to give way to somebody else, I am more than happy.
Keir Starmer
To assure the Prime Minister, I am not expressing my own view; I am putting to him the evidence of experts to Committees yesterday.
Testing was referred to by the Prime Minister. That on its own is obviously not enough. What is needed is testing, tracing and isolation. At yesterday’s press conference, the deputy chief scientific adviser said that we could draw particular lessons from Germany and South Korea, which have both had intensive testing and tracing. The number of covid-19 deaths in Germany stands at around 8,000. In South Korea, it is under 300. In contrast, in the United Kingdom, despite 2 million tests having been carried out, there has been no effective tracing in place since 12 March, when tracing was abandoned. That is nearly 10 weeks in a critical period without effective tracing. That is a huge hole in our defences, isn’t it, Prime Minister?
The Prime Minister
I have given my answer, but what I will say is that I think that it is important that we support our NHS and that we invest massively in our NHS. This Government—this one nation Conservative Government—are determined to invest more in our NHS than at any time in modern memory. We have already begun that, and we will want to see our fantastic frontline workers paid properly. That is, I think, the best way forward. I want to see our NHS staff paid properly, our NHS supported and I want to continue our programme not just of building 40 more hospitals, but recruiting 50,000 more nurses and investing hugely in our NHS, and I believe that will be warmly welcomed across the whole of our establishment of our fantastic NHS.
Sara Britcliffe (Hyndburn) (Con) [V]
The Prime Minister
Yes. We have pushed back the cut-off date in order to help people, but we are also looking to support people who are in difficulties with some temporary measures on welfare, as he knows—the significant £1,040 increase in universal credit standard allowance and the working tax credit basic element. If there are particularly hard cases, and there will be hard cases, I say what I have said before to the House: I am happy to take them up on my hon. Friend’s behalf.
Allan Dorans (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) (SNP) [V]
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to speak up for the young people of Telford and their immense potential, and that is why we will be supporting her and them with a new national skills fund worth £2.5 billion, so that young people can be at the very forefront of our effort to come out of this epidemic.
Mr Speaker
That is the end of PMQs. Before the urgent question, I should say that I plan to allow a statement by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on the UK’s approach to Northern Ireland protocol as part of the scrutiny proceedings. I will allow less time for the urgent question and the business statement as a consequence.
We now come to the urgent question to the Leader of the House. I will end the urgent question at 12.55. I call the Leader of the House, Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg, to answer the urgent question from Alistair Carmichael. The Leader of the House should speak for no more than three minutes.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(4 years, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wendy Chamberlain
I add my thanks to the people of Scotland for the effort they are making, particularly those who are already volunteering and providing vital services to those in their communities who are vulnerable.
In the past 24 hours, I have been contacted by several different local businesses in the self-catered accommodation industry. They thought they would be eligible for covid-19 grants for small and medium-sized businesses in retail, leisure and hospitality, but yesterday they discovered that they had explicitly been listed by the Scottish Government as not being eligible. Anyone who operates a chalet, a caravan or a B&B is eligible, but self-catering accommodation is specifically excluded, alongside ATM sites, jetties and pigeon lofts, among others.
If my constituents operated elsewhere in the UK, they would be supported. The message from them is clear: without these grants, the self-catering accommodation industry in Scotland is in peril. We cannot let this happen. I appreciate that this is a really difficult and challenging time for Governments, but will the Secretary of State make representations to the Scottish Government to reconsider their exclusions, in order to ensure consistency of support and the future of this industry?
Mr Jack
I thank the hon. Lady for raising that really important point. The self-catering industry, including self-catering cottages, is a massive issue for rural Scotland, and not just in her beautiful constituency but in my more beautiful constituency. An emergency package of measures will be announced next week. Our colleagues in the Scottish Parliament are discussing that today. The Scotland Office has already raised the issue and we are very keen to see a support package for those rural businesses, particularly self-catering businesses and others, including caravan parks. If they only have residential caravan stayers, we want them all to be supported in whatever way necessary. As the Chancellor has said, we will do whatever it takes.
Dean Russell (Watford) (Con)
Will my right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister and the whole House join me in paying tribute to the former MP for Watford, Tristan Garel-Jones, who passed away yesterday?
Chris Stephens (Glasgow South West) (SNP)
The Secretary of State will be aware that some companies are operating at the moment that should not be—they are defying the advice from the Prime Minister. Will the Secretary of State therefore raise this issue with colleagues in the UK Government to ensure that these companies still trading at the moment will have closure orders put on them and will face heavy fines if they continue trading from today onwards?
Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019 Section 3(5)
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(4 years, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019 Section 4
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(4 years, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Emma Little Pengelly (Belfast South) (DUP)
I thank the hon. Lady for giving way. One particular challenge in Northern Ireland—[Interruption.] Had she finished?
Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Lindsay Hoyle)
I do not think she had given way. Let us just clarify this. Have you finished your speech?
Carolyn Harris
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I am here and I did speak up? It is a matter of record that I have a real interest in this, in any part of the United Kingdom—I am not invisible.
Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Lindsay Hoyle)
We are dealing with section 4. I understand that, quite rightly, the point has been made and the hon. Gentleman has got it on the record, but I am sure that as the spokesperson for the DUP on gambling he desperately wants to get to the points that are relevant.
Ian Paisley
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Of course, as I have said, the hon. Lady—my hon. Friend—has a particular and well-known interest in this, but the Members who brought forward the legislation are not here, and I think that is a fair point to make. It is important for my constituents out there watching this event to understand who really cares about these issues, and to see that we are left to mop up the political issues that Members bring before us.
I am sorry to say to the Minister that this report on the Executive Formation Act and gambling is utterly irrelevant. It says that there is no work done in this area. In 2016, the Department of Health, and then the Department for Communities and Local Government, commissioned a report on the prevalence of gambling. They found that the levels of gambling in Northern Ireland were slightly higher—about 2% higher—than in England, about equal with Scotland, and slightly higher than in Wales. That is not mentioned in the report. It did not talk about those issues of prevalence. It was about setting down a measurement of where the issue of gambling rests. We should be targeting issues that it has identified, such as how we cope with problem gambling—the actual figures.
Facts are stubborn things. The facts were recorded by the Departments, and that should have been reflected in this report. I do not blame the Government for bringing forward an utterly irrelevant report. They were asked to commission a report in a fit of pique by some Members of this House, and now they have rushed into bringing forward a report that is irrelevant because it has not even dealt with some of the issues that exist.
The laws that pertain to gaming and gambling in Northern Ireland are already very different from those that obtain in the rest of the United Kingdom. Indeed, this matter, as Members across the House have rightly said, ought to be left to the Assembly unless we are prepared to introduce a root-and-branch change to all gaming and gambling legislation in Northern Ireland and make it identical to the rest the UK. Let us look at where things would then be different. For example, in English high streets we see four or five competing gambling companies running the same shops, neighbour to neighbour, on the same street, whereas in Northern Ireland we see maybe one gaming or gambling shop in a street, and then several streets away there might be another one.
I have heard Members of this House demanding that that sort of thing should happen in England. The fact is that it happens in Northern Ireland by agreement among the betting shop owners. There are, in effect, only about three major betting shop owners in Northern Ireland, and they have made that agreement among themselves. Yet that is not reflected in the report either. Would we like to import what has happened in Northern Ireland, which is a good thing, to the rest of the United Kingdom, or would we like to import what has happened in England and have numerous betting shops lined along street after street in Northern Ireland? I think that my constituents, and all my colleagues, would object to seeing their streets having loads of these shops. We do not have the prevalence of these shops that England has. We have no Sunday betting at all. In England, people can bet seven days a week. It is not possible to go into a betting shop in Northern Ireland on the Sabbath and bet; we have that restriction. Will we just import those regulations into Northern Ireland and change Northern Ireland’s culture? That would be crazy.
Scotland Bill
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(8 years, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
I must draw the House’s attention to the fact that financial privilege is involved in Lords amendment 22. If the House agrees with the amendment, I shall ensure that the appropriate entry is made in the Journal.
Clause 3
Elections
The Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell)
I beg to move, That this House agrees with Lords amendment 1.
Mr Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendments 2 to 62.
David Mundell
This is a truly significant day for Scotland. If this Bill completes its parliamentary progress, it will add to the already extensive responsibilities of the Scottish Parliament a range of important new powers. It provides even greater opportunities for the Scottish Government to tailor and deliver Scottish solutions to Scottish issues. The Scottish Parliament that returns in May will be a powerhouse Parliament that has come of age. Crucially, it will be much more accountable to the people who elect it, which is the hallmark of a mature democratic institution.
I am pleased to say that Lord Smith of Kelvin has confirmed that the Bill puts into law the agreement that the five main political parties in Scotland reached, and that the fiscal framework that was agreed means that the recommendations of his commission have been delivered in full.
Last week, the Scottish Parliament debated the motion on whether to grant legislative consent to the Bill before us today, and the agreement was unanimous. Deputy First Minister John Swinney remarked:
“The Smith process delivered an agreement for additional powers that—if they are used in the right way—can benefit the people of Scotland.”—[Scottish Parliament Official Report, 16 March 2016; c. 3.]
I agree with him wholeheartedly on that.
The debate last week demonstrated the consensus among all parties in Scotland that these new powers present a tremendous opportunity for Scotland. That was clear in their unanimous vote to grant legislative consent to this Bill. This process goes to show that both of Scotland’s Governments and both of Scotland’s Parliaments can work effectively together in the interest of the people in Scotland and right across our United Kingdom.
No individual or party held a monopoly of wisdom on how the Smith agreement might best be translated into legislation. Many people, both inside and outside this Chamber, have contributed to the Bill as it stands before us today. I thank hon. Members and noble Lords for their contributions as the Bill passed through this House and the other place.
Scotland Bill
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(8 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bob Blackman
On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Last night, on Remembrance Sunday, a picture of a swastika was projected on to the House of Commons with a message saying, “Modi not welcome”. As you will be aware, the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, is visiting here later this week. Can you confirm that this will be thoroughly investigated, that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Government or the House authorities, and that the perpetrators will be caught and suitably punished?
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
On Remembrance Sunday there is no time when it is acceptable to project anything on to the House of Commons without permission, but to project a swastika on the visit of a state leader is totally unacceptable. The point has been made, and it will be taken on board and dealt with. I am absolutely convinced that the police will be looking into it as a matter of urgency.
Sir Edward Leigh
On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Will you just explain the procedure of the House, because I have not been here very long—
Mr Deputy Speaker
I know that I do not need to explain it to you, and I do not need to waste any more time because we need to move on to the Bill.
Sir Edward Leigh
I know they are very rare. Am I right, Mr Deputy Speaker, in thinking that it would be in order for any amendment to be moved? I am rather surprised that the SNP has not moved amendment 224 on “full fiscal autonomy but not quite yet”. Is there any reason that would have prevented it from moving that amendment?
Mr Deputy Speaker
It is not for the Chair to decide what the SNP does; it is up to the SNP to decide what it moves or does not move. As I said, I knew that it was not a point of order, and I knew that you knew the answer before you asked me.
New Clause 14
“Welfare foods
‘(1) Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, Section F1 (social security schemes) is amended as follows.
(2) In the Exceptions, after exception 8 (see section 23 above) insert—
“Exception 9
The subject-matter of section 13 of the Social Security Act 1988 (benefits under schemes for improving nutrition: pregnant women, mothers and children).”
(3) In the Interpretation provision, at the end insert—
“The reference to the subject-matter of section 13 of the Social Security Act 1988 is to be construed as a reference to it as at the day on which section [Welfare foods] of the Scotland Act 2015 comes into force (and, accordingly, paragraph 5(1) of Part 3 of this Schedule does not apply to that reference).”
(4) Omit Section J5 (welfare foods).
(5) In the Social Security Act 1988, in section 13(2) (benefits under schemes for improving nutrition: consultation) omit “the Scottish Ministers and”.”—(David Mundell.)
This amendment devolves to the Scottish Parliament legislative competence regarding welfare foods, enabling the Scottish Parliament, in relation to Scotland, to abolish or amend schemes for the provision of welfare foods, as currently made under section 13 of the Social Security Act 1988, or to make new schemes for the provision of welfare foods.
Brought up, and read the First time.
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
With this it will be convenient to discuss Government new clause 34—Power to create other new benefits.
Government new clause 15—Abortion.
Government new clause 16—Public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities.
Government new clause 17—Destination of fines, forfeitures and fixed penalties.
New clause 2—
“New benefits
In Section F1 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, in the Exceptions, after exception 8 (see section 23 above) insert—
“Exception 9
A benefit not in existence at the relevant date provided entitlement to or the purpose of the benefit is different from entitlement to or the purpose of any benefit that is— For the purpose of this exception—
(a) in existence at the relevant date,
(b) payable by or on behalf of a Minister of the Crown, and
(c) otherwise a reserved benefit.
“the relevant date” means the date of introduction into Parliament of the Bill that becomes the Scotland Act 2015;
“reserved benefit” means a benefit which is to any extent a reserved matter.””
The new Clause expands and clarifies the right of the Scottish Government to create new benefits—that is, benefits not in existence on the date on which the bill is passed.
New clause 3—
“Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution
‘(1) There is to be a Committee (to be known as the Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution) to examine the transfer, implementation and operation of the powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament by Part 3 of this Act.
(2) The Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution is to be responsible for ensuring full co-operation, consultation and information-sharing between the UK Government, the Scottish Government, and relevant stakeholders.
(3) The Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution is to publish a report—
(a) on the transfer and implementation of the powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament by Part 3 of this Act at least once every three months for the first three years from the date when this Act is passed, and
(b) on the operation of the powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament by Part 3 of this Act at least once in each calendar year after three years from the date when this Act is passed.
(4) Schedule (The Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution), which makes further provision in relation to the Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution, has effect.”
This new Clause, linked to New Schedule NS1 on the Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution, provides for a cross-Parliament committee to oversee the transition and implementation of welfare powers transferred under this Act. The Committee would include members from both Parliaments and would be required to report frequently in the transition phase and thereafter annually.
New clause 5—
“Childcare element of universal credit
In Section F1 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, in Exceptions, after exception 6 (see section 22 above) insert—
“Exception 7
The subject-matter of regulations 31 to 34 of the Universal Credit Regulations 2013.””
This new clause would devolve to the Scottish Parliament the power to make rules about the childcare element of Universal Credit.
New clause 10—
“Commission on social and economic rights
‘(1) The Secretary of State shall appoint a commission on social and economic rights.
(2) The Secretary of State shall invite the Presiding Officers or Speakers of the House of Commons, House of Lords, National Assembly of Wales, Northern Ireland Assembly and the Scottish Parliament each to nominate no more than three persons to the commission on social and economic rights.
(3) The commission on social and economic rights must report on—
(a) the practicality of making the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government subject to the rights contained in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and
(b) the consequences of Scottish devolution for the attainment of economic and social rights throughout the United Kingdom.
(4) The Secretary of State may by regulations determine the role, composition, organisation and powers of the commission on social and economic rights.”
The purpose of this New Clause is to create a commission to consider whether economic and social rights could be made justiciable in Scotland, and the prospects for achieving fuller attainment of economic and social rights throughout the United Kingdom.
New clause 18—
“Tax credits
‘(1) In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, Section F1 is amended as follows.
(2) In the Exceptions, after exception 9 (see section (Welfare foods) (2) above) insert—
“Exception 10
The subject-matter of the Tax Credits Act 2002.””
This New Clause devolves to the Scottish Parliament the power to make provision for child tax credit, and working tax credit.
New clause 19—
“Employment and industrial relations
‘(1) In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, Head H (Employment) is amended as follows.
(2) Omit Section H1 (employment and industrial relations).
(3) Insert new Section H1A as follows.
“H1A. National Minimum Wage
The subject-matter of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.””
This new clause would devolve employment rights and duties and industrial relations, except for the national minimum wage, to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 20—
“National minimum wage
‘(1) In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, Head H (Employment) is amended as follows.
(2) Omit ‘(h) the National Minimum Wage Act 1998’.
(3) For the heading “Exception”, substitute “Exceptions”.
(4) After the heading “Exceptions” insert—
“(none) “The subject-matter of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.””
This new clause would devolve the subject-matter of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 21—
“National Insurance: employers’ contributions
‘(1) Section F1 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998 is amended as follows.
(2) In the illustrations, omit “National Insurance;”
(3) In the Exceptions, after exception 11 (see section (Benefits relating to children)) insert—
“Exception 12
National Insurance so far as relating to contributions payable by employers.””
This new clause would devolve employers’ National Insurance contributions to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 22—
“Job search and support
In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, omit Section H3 (job search and support).”
This new clause would devolve employment support programmes to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 23—
“Working age benefits
In Section F1 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, in the Exceptions, after exception 9 (see section 23A above) insert—
“Exception 10
Benefits entitlement to which, or the purposes of which, are the same as or similar to those of any of the following benefits—
(a) universal credit under Part 1 of the Welfare Reform Act 2012;
(b) jobseeker’s allowance (whether contributions-based or income based) under the Jobseekers Act 1995;
(c) employment and support allowance (whether contributory or income-related) under Part 1 of the Welfare Reform Act 2007;
(d) income support under section 124 of the Social Security and Benefits Act 1992;
(e) housing benefit under section 130 of that Act and
(f) child tax credit and working tax credit under the Tax Credits Act 2002.
The benefits referred to in paragraphs (a) to (f) above are—(a) in the case of income-based jobseeker’s allowance and income-related employment support allowance, those benefits as they existed on 28 April 2013 (the day before their abolition), (b) in the case of the other benefits, those benefits as they existed on 28 May 2015 (the date of introduction into Parliament of the Bill for the Scotland Act 2015.””
This new clause would devolve working age benefits to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 24—
“Universal credit: powers to vary other elements
‘(1) A function of making regulations to which this section applies, so far as it is exercisable by the Secretary of State in or as regards Scotland, is exercisable by the Scottish Ministers concurrently with the Secretary of State.
(2) This section applies to—
(a) regulations under section 8(3)(a) of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 (amount in respect of earned income) so far relating to the work allowance (that is, the amount of a claimant’s earned income that is to be disregarded in calculating the amounts to be deducted from the maximum amount in accordance with section 8(3) of that Act),
(b) regulations under section 10 of that Act (amount in respect of responsibility for children and young persons),
(c) regulations under section 12 of that Act (amounts in respect of other particular needs or circumstances) so far as relating to—
(i) the needs or circumstances referred to in subsection (2)(c) of that section (caring responsibilities for a severely disabled person), or
(ii) needs or circumstances of a claimant in paid work relating to childcare costs,
(d) regulations under any of sections 14 to 22, 24 and 25 of that Act (work-related requirements), and
(e) regulations under any of sections 26 to 28 of that Act (sanctions).
(3) The Scottish Ministers may not exercise the function of making regulations to which this section applies unless they have consulted the Secretary of State.
(4) The Secretary of State may not exercise the function of making regulations to which this section applies in or as regards Scotland unless he or she has consulted the Scottish Ministers.
(5) Where regulations are made by the Scottish Ministers by virtue of subsection (1)—
(a) section 43 of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 (regulations: procedure) does not apply, and
(b) the regulations are subject to the negative procedure (see Part 2 of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010).””
This new clause would give the Scottish Parliament greater flexibility to make changes in Universal Credit.
New clause 25—
“Benefits relating to children
In Section F1 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, in the Exceptions, after exception 10 (see section (Working age benefits) above) insert—
“Exception 11
Benefits entitlement to which, or the purposes of which, are the same as or similar to those of any of the following benefits—
(a) guardian’s allowance under section 77 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992;
(b) child benefit under Part 9 of that Act.
The benefits referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) are those benefits as they existed on 28 May 2015 (the date of introduction into Parliament of the Bill for the Scotland Act 2015).””
This new clause would devolve benefits relating to children to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 26—
“Health and safety
‘(1) In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998 (“the 1998 Act”), omit Section H2 (health and safety).
(2) The Health and Safety Executive is a cross-border public authority for the purposes of the 1998 Act.
(3) The 1998 Act applies in relation to the Health and Safety Executive in the same way as it applies in relation to cross-border public authorities specified in an Order in Council under section 88(5) of the 1998 Act.”
This new clause would devolve health and safety to the Scottish Parliament and designates the Health and Safety Executive as a cross-border public authority.
New clause 27—
“Equal opportunities
“In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, omit Section L2 (equal opportunities).”
This new clause would devolve equal opportunities to the Scottish Parliament.
New clause 28—
“Crown property
‘(1) Part 1 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998 (general reservations) is amended as follows.
(2) Omit paragraph 2(3)
(3) In paragraph 3(3), omit paragraph (a).
(4) After paragraph 3, insert—
“(3A) Without prejudice to paragraphs 2 and 3, paragraph 1 does not reserve—
(a) removing or altering functions of, or conferring functions on, the Crown Estate Commissioners in relation to the holding or management of property within paragraph 3(1),
(b) where a function of the Crown Estate Commissioners of holding property is so removed, the transfer of any property held in exercise of the function.”
(5) Functions relating to Crown property are, so far as they relate to Crown property in or relating to the Scottish offshore region, to be treated for the purposes of the Scotland Act 1998 as exercisable in or as regards Scotland.
(6) In subsection (5)—
“Crown property” means property within paragraph 3(1) of Part 1 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, “Scottish offshore region” has the same meaning as in the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (see section 322 of that Act)
(7) In section 1(2) of the Civil List Act 1952 (payment of hereditary revenues into the Scottish Consolidated Fund), omit “from bona vacantia, ultimus haeres and treasure trove”.”
This alternative to clause 31 would reduce the complexity of the current arrangements relating to the Crown Estate by removing the reservation relating to the management of the Crown Estate and provides the Scottish Parliament with full legislative competence in relation to the management of the Crown Estate in or as regards Scotland. It would also transfer any functions of the Crown Estate Commissioners in relation to rights to the continental shelf beyond the 200 nautical mile limit adjacent to Scotland.
New clause 29—
“Party political broadcasts
In Section K1 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998 (broadcasting), after the reservation insert—
“Exceptions
(a) party political broadcasts in connection with elections that are within the legislative competence of the Parliament, and
(b) referendum campaign broadcasts in connection with referendums held under Acts of the Scottish Parliament.””
New clause 30—
“Broadcasting
Leave out section K1 in Part 2 of Schedule 5 (Broadcasting) to the 1998 Act.”
New clause 31—
“Levies in respect of agriculture, taking wild game, aquaculture and fisheries etc.
‘(1) In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998, Section A1 is amended as follows.
(2) In the Exceptions, after the exception for devolved taxes insert—
(3) After the Exceptions insert—
“Interpretation
“agriculture” includes horticulture, fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming and livestock breeding and keeping, and the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, osier land, market gardens and nursery grounds.
“aquaculture” includes the breeding, rearing or cultivation of fish (of any kind), seafood or aquatic organisms.
“related activity” means the production, processing, manufacture, marketing or distribution of—
(a) anything (including any creature alive or dead) produced or taken in the course of agriculture, taking wild game or aquaculture, or caught (by any means) in a fishery,
(b) any product which is derived to any substantial extent from anything so produced or caught.””
This new Clause would give the Scottish Parliament general legislative competence in respect of agricultural, aquacultural and fisheries levies.
New clause 32—
“Rail Services
In Part 2 of Schedule 5 to the Act, in section E2, after “Exceptions” there is inserted—
This amendment would devolve rail services in Scotland giving Scottish Ministers full powers and flexibility to decide who would run such services.
New clause 33—
“Civil Aviation Authority
‘(1) In Section 1 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982, at end insert—
“(4) The Secretary of State must consult the Scottish Ministers about the strategic priorities of the Secretary of State in exercising functions under subsection (1), and in relation to activities of the Civil Aviation Authority.
(5) In subsection (4), “Scotland” has the same meaning as in the Scotland Act 1998.””
This New Clause would allow a ‘formal consultative role’ for the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament in setting the strategic priorities for the Civil Aviation Authority.
New schedule 1—The Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution
Membership
1 The Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution is to comprise the Secretary of State, who is to be the chair of the Committee, and the following other members—
(a) the Scottish Minister who is responsible to the Scottish Parliament for welfare policy and payments, who is to be the deputy chair of the Committee;
(b) the Member of the House of Commons who is for the time being the Chair of the Work and Pensions Select Committee of the House of Commons;
(c) the Member of the Scottish Parliament who is for the time being the Chair of the Welfare Reform Committee of the Scottish Parliament;
(d) two Members of the House of Commons who are not Ministers of the Crown;
(e) two Members of the Scottish Parliament who are not Scottish Ministers; and
(f) two persons representing local government in Scotland.
2 The members of the Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution mentioned in paragraph 1(d) are to be appointed to membership of the Committee by the Speaker of the House of Commons.
3 The members of the Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution mentioned in paragraph 1 (e) are to be appointed to membership of the Committee by the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament.
4 The members of the Joint Committee on Welfare Devolution mentioned in paragraph 1(f) are to be appointed to membership of the Committee by Scottish Ministers after consultation with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.
5 In this Schedule, references to the Work and Pensions Select Committee of the House of Commons are—
(a) if the name of that Committee is changed, to be taken (subject to paragraph (b)) to be references to the Committee by its new name;
(b) if the functions of that Committee at the passing of this Act with respect to welfare policy and payments (or functions substantially corresponding thereto) become functions of a different committee of the House of Commons, to be taken to be references to the committee by whom the functions are for the time being exercisable.
6 In this Schedule, references to the Welfare Reform Committee of the Scottish Parliament are—
(a) if the name of that Committee is changed, to be taken (subject to paragraph (b)) to be references to the Committee by its new name;
(b) if the functions of that Committee at the passing of this Act with respect to welfare policy and payments (or functions substantially corresponding thereto) become functions of a different committee of the Scottish Parliament, to be taken to be references to the committee by whom the functions are for the time being exercisable.
Term of office of Committee members
7 A member may resign from the Committee at any time by giving notice to the Secretary of State.
8 A member may be re-appointed (or further re-appointed) to membership of the Committee.
Committee proceedings
9 The Joint Committee on Welfare Reform may determine its own procedure.
10 The validity of any proceedings of the Joint Committee on Welfare Reform is not affected by—
(a) any vacancy among, or
(b) any defect in the appointment of any of, the members of the Committee.
11 The Joint Committee on Welfare Reform may appoint a member of the Committee to act as chair at any meeting of the Committee in the absence of both the Secretary of State and the Scottish Minster who is deputy chair of the Committee.
Advisory Panel
12 The Secretary of State and Scottish Ministers acting jointly may make regulations appointing an advisory panel on the transfer, implementation and operation of the powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament by Part 3 of this Act, comprising academics, representatives of the third sector and voluntary organisations, and other relevant stakeholders.
13 The Joint Committee on Welfare Reform must consult any advisory panel appointed under paragraph 12 of this Schedule.
This new Schedule is linked to New Clause NC3 (Joint Committee on Welfare Reform) and makes provision about membership and proceedings of the Joint Committee, including the appointment of an advisory panel including third sector and academic experts.
Amendment 194, in clause 19, page 21, line 39, leave out from “of” to end of line 7 on page 22 and insert “a disabled person or person with a physical or mental impairment or health condition in respect of effects or needs arising from that disability, impairment or health condition.”
Government amendments 70, 71, 72, 73, 191 and 192
Amendment 21, in clause 21, page 24, leave out lines 13 to 20.
This amendment would allow the Scottish Parliament to legislate for topping up reserved benefits by providing financial assistance in any case where the requirement for it arises from reduction, non-payability or suspension of a reserved benefit as a result of an individual’s conduct.
Amendment 159, in clause 22, page 24, leave out lines 36 to 48.
This amendment would remove some of the restrictions, including those relating to sanctions, in relation to discretionary housing payments.
Government amendments 76.
Amendment 22, in clause 22, page 25, leave out lines 1 to 8.
This amendment would allow the Scottish Parliament to legislate for making discretionary housing payments by providing financial assistance in any case where the requirement for it arises from reduction, non-payability or suspension of a reserved benefit as a result of an individual’s conduct.
Amendment 23, in clause 23, page 25, leave out lines 30 to 37.
This amendment would allow the Scottish Parliament to legislate for making discretionary payments to meet short-term needs by providing financial assistance in any case where the requirement for it arises from reduction, non-payability or suspension of a reserved benefit as a result of an individual’s conduct.
Amendment 161, in clause 23, page 25, line 40, after “individuals”, insert “—
“(a) ”
Amendment 162, in clause 23, page 25, line 45, at end add “, or (b) who are part of a family facing exceptional pressure.”
Amendment 163, in clause 24, page 26, line 20, leave out from “unless” to end of line 25 and insert “they have consulted the Secretary of State”
This amendment would remove the requirement for the Scottish Government to obtain consent from a UK Secretary of State in relation to Universal Credit and the costs of claimants who rent accommodation.
Government amendments 77.
Amendment 24, page 26, line 25, leave out “unreasonably”
This amendment would make it clear that the UK Government cannot withhold agreement and will have a legal obligation to agree to any changes to regulations made by the Scottish Government using the new regulation-making powers conferred under clause 24.
Amendment 32, page 26, line 35, leave out “negative procedure (see section 28” and insert “affirmative procedure (see section 29”
This amendment would require regulations made by Scottish Ministers under subsection (1) of Clause 24 (Universal credit: costs of claimants who rent accommodation) to be subject to the Scottish Parliament’s affirmative procedure.
Amendment 164, in clause 25, page 26, line 45, leave out from “unless” to end of line 5 on page 27 and insert “they have consulted the Secretary of State”.
This amendment would remove the requirement for the Scottish Government to obtain consent from a UK Secretary of State in relation to persons to who, and time when, Universal Credit is paid.
Government amendments 78.
Amendment 25, page 27, line 5, leave out “unreasonably”.
This amendment would make it clear that the UK Government cannot withhold agreement and will have a legal obligation to agree to any changes to regulations made by the Scottish Government using the new regulation-making powers conferred under clause 25.
Amendment 33, page 27, line 13, leave out “negative procedure (see section 28” and insert “affirmative procedure (see section 29”.
This amendment would require regulations made by Scottish Ministers under subsection (1) of Clause 25 (Universal credit: person to whom, and time when, paid) to be subject to the Scottish Parliament’s affirmative procedure.
Amendment 165, in clause 26, page 27, line 22, leave out from beginning to “for” in line 23 and insert “Arrangements”.
Amendments 165, 166 and 167 make provision for the Scottish Parliament to have power to legislate on arrangements for employment support programmes.
Amendment 166, page 27, leave out lines 27 to 29 and insert—“assisting persons (including persons claiming reserved benefits) who are unemployed or at risk of long-term unemployment to select, obtain and retain employment;”
Amendments 165, 166 and 167 make provision for the Scottish Parliament to have power to legislate on arrangements for employment support programmes
Amendment 167, page 27, line 34, leave out “another person” and insert “a person other than the person making the arrangements”.
Amendments 165, 166 and 167 make provision for the Scottish Parliament to have power to legislate on arrangements for employment support programmes.
Government amendments 79, 80, 82, 193 and 83.
Amendment 168, page 30, line 30, leave out Clause 31.
Amendment 11, in clause 31, page 30, line 34, leave out “may” and insert “must following agreement with the Scottish Government”.
Government amendments 84 to 89.
Amendment 12, page 32, line 25, leave out “C” and insert “A”.
Amendment 13, page 32, line 31, leave out “then, instead of the type C procedure”.
Amendment 14, page 32, line 31, leave out “I” and insert “A”.
Government amendments 90 to 96.
Amendment 169, in clause 32, page 33, line 44, leave out subsection (2).
This amendment delivers a more explicit reference to the devolution of competence over gender quotas in respect of public bodies in Scotland but ensures that it is “not limited to” gender quotas, as agreed in the Smith Commission report.
Amendment 225, page 34, line 2, leave out subsection (3) and insert—
‘(3) Under the heading “Exceptions”, at end insert—
(none) Equal opportunities in relation to the Scottish functions of any Scottish public authority or cross-border public authority including appointments to the board of any Scottish public authority. The provision falling within this exception includes provision that reproduces or applies an enactment contained in the Equality Act 2006 or the Equality Act 2010, with or without modification, without affecting the enactment as it applies for the purposes of those Acts. It does not include any modification of those Acts, other than modifications of the types specified in paragraphs (a) to (d)
(a) provision that supplements or is otherwise additional to provision made by those Acts, and which may enhance but may not diminish the protection and promotion of equal opportunities afforded by the provision made by those Acts;
(b) in particular, provision imposing a requirement to take action that the Acts do not prohibit;
(c) provision that extends application of the existing powers and duties of, or grants additional powers to, the Commission for Equality and Human Rights in respect of provisions made under any part of subsection (3)
(d) provision that requires the Commission for Equality and Human Rights to attend the proceedings of the Scottish Parliament for the purposes of giving evidence and to send each annual report of the Commission to the Scottish Ministers and that requires the Scottish Ministers to lay each annual report received before the Scottish Parliament.”
This amendment makes provision for the Scottish Parliament to have legislative competence in respect of the public sector equality duty, and in respect of equality of opportunity in relation to the functions of Scottish and cross-border public authorities, including appointments to public boards. It clarifies that the Scottish Parliament’s power to make modifications to the Equality Acts 2006 and 2010 is limited to making provision that enhances the protection and promotion of equal opportunities. The amendment makes provision for the powers of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to be applied in relation to any modifications to the Acts. It also enables provision to be made to increase the accountability of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to the Scottish Parliament.
Government amendments 97 and 98.
Amendment 171, in clause 32, page 34, line 4, at end insert—
“Equal opportunities in relation to an appointment as a member of a Scottish public authority.”
Government amendments 100 and 99.
Amendment 26, page 34, line 13, at end insert “including the imposition of minimum quotas for women and other persons with protected characteristics across all levels of public and political representation in Scotland.”
This Amendment is intended to make explicit that, among the exceptions to reserved matters on equal opportunities, the power is being devolved to the Scottish Parliament to set gender quotas.
Amendment 157, page 34, line 16, at end insert—
“(d) equal opportunity provisions in relation to candidates at an election for membership of the Scottish Parliament and a local government election in Scotland.”
This would allow the necessary competence for gender quotas in relation to the Scottish Parliament and local government to be transferred to the Scottish Parliament.
Government amendment 101.
Amendment 172, page 34, line 18, leave out “the Equality Act 2010 and Part 1 of that Act” and insert “and the Equality Act 2010”.
Government amendment 102.
Amendment 173, in clause 32, page 34, line 25, leave out subsection (6) and insert—
‘( ) In section 2 (power to amend section1)—
(a) in subsection (7), omit “the Scottish Ministers or”,
(b) in subsection (10), before “Ministers” insert “Welsh””
Government amendment 103.
Amendment 174, page 34, line 37, leave out subsection (9) and insert—
‘( ) In section 216 (commencement) at the beginning of subsection (3) insert “Subject to subsection (4),” and after that subsection insert—
(4) Part 1 comes into force on such day as the Scottish Ministers may by order appoint so far as it—
(a) confers a power on the Scottish Ministers
(b) relates to a public authority in respect of which such a power is exercisable.
(5) The following do not apply to an order under subsection (4)—
(a) section 207(2) (see instead section 27 of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010: powers exercisable by Scottish statutory instrument), and
(b) section 210.””
Government amendment 104.
Amendment 175, page 35, line 2, leave out subsection (10).
Government amendment 105.
Amendment 15, page 35, leave out lines 18 and 19.
Amendment 16, page 35, leave out lines 24 and 25.
Amendment 176, page 35, leave out lines 26 to 30 and insert—
‘(nonenone) “This Schedule does not reserve the transfer of all the functions of a tribunal referred to in sub-paragraph (2) to a Scottish tribunal, so far as the functions are exercisable in relation to Scottish cases or a specified category of Scottish cases, in accordance with provision made by Her Majesty by Order in Council.”
This amendment would ensure that all functions exercisable in relation to Scottish cases or a specified category of Scottish cases should transfer to the Scottish Parliament.
Amendment 17, page 35, leave out lines 26 to 30.
Amendment 177, page 35, leave out from beginning of line 31 to end of line 7 on page 36.
Amendment 178, page 36, line 22, at end insert—
‘( ) For the avoidance of doubt, this Schedule does not reserve—
(a) a Scottish tribunal’s practice and procedure when exercising functions that have been transferred to it by virtue of this paragraph, or
(b) the fees and expenses chargeable for, or in connection with, proceedings before a Scottish tribunal when it is exercising those functions.”
This amendment makes clear that competence over a tribunal’s practice, rules of procedure and fees in relation to transferred cases becomes devolved, as per the Smith Commission recommendation.
Amendment 179, in clause 34, page 37, line 28, leave out from “relating” to “to” in line 29.
This amendment would remove a restriction on the full devolution of speed limits in relation to emergency vehicles.
Amendment 180, in clause 36, page 41, line 15, leave out paragraph (a) and insert—
“(a) in relation to vehicles used on roads in Scotland, means the Scottish Ministers.”
Amendment 181, page 41, line 19, at end insert—
‘(18) In section 130 (application of Act to Crown)—
(a) in subsection (3) for “Secretary of State” substitute “relevant authority”, and
(b) after that subsection insert—
(3A) In subsection (3) “relevant authority”—
(a) in relation to vehicles used on roads in Scotland, means the Scottish Ministers,
(b) otherwise, means the Secretary of State.”
This amendment would amend section 130(3) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 so that Scottish Ministers are added into the provision as the relevant “national authority”.
Government amendments 106 to 128.
Amendment 182, in clause 45, page 47, leave out lines 4 to 8, and insert—
“The number of relevant gaming machines authorised (if any) in respect of premises licences under the Gambling Act 2005.
A “relevant gaming machine” is a gaming machine (within the meaning of section 235 of the Gambling Act 2005) for which the maximum charge for use is more than £10.”
This amendment replaces the reference to betting premises with a more general reference to gambling premises, giving full effect to Smith Commission recommendation 74.
Amendment 18, page 47, line 7 , leave out “for which the maximum charge for use is more than £10”.
Amendment 1, page 47, line 7, leave out “£10” and insert “£2”.
Amendment 183, page 47, leave out lines 13 to 20 and insert—
“(a) the Scottish Ministers in respect of premises in Scotland in so far as the order varies the number of gaming machines authorised (if any) for which the maximum charge for use is more than £10, or
(b) otherwise, the Secretary of State.”
This amendment replaces the reference to betting premises with a more general reference to gambling premises, giving full effect to Smith Commission recommendation 74.
Amendment 19, page 47, line 17, leave out “for which the maximum charge for use is more than £10”.
Amendment 2, page 47, line 18, leave out “£10” and insert “£2”.
Amendment 3, page 47, line 18, after “£10”, insert—
‘( ) the content and the speed of play,”
Amendment 4, page 47, line 18, after “£10”, insert—
‘( ) the number of staff required to supervise such machines,”
Amendment 20, page 47, line 35, leave out subsection (6).
Government amendments 137 to 139.
Amendment 184, in clause 50, page 49, leave out from line 32 to line 50 on page 50 and insert—
‘(4) The Scottish Ministers may not make regulations under section 9 unless they have consulted the Secretary of State about the proposed regulations.
(5) Subsection (1) does not prevent the Secretary of State making a support scheme in relation to Scotland under section 9, or varying or revoking regulations made by the Scottish Ministers under that section with the agreement of the Scottish Ministers.”
Government amendments 140 to 143.
Amendment 185, in clause 51, page 52, line 9, leave out from beginning to end of line 6 on page 53 and insert—
‘(4) The power of the Scottish Ministers under section 33BC does not include power to make provision in relation to the subject matter of sections 88 to 90 of the Energy Act 2008 (smart meters).
(5) The Scottish Ministers may not make an order under section 33BC unless they have consulted the Secretary of State about the proposed order.
(6) The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under section 33BC is exercisable so as to make any provision that may be made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, or vary or revoke an order made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, but only with the agreement of the Scottish Ministers.”
Government amendments 144 to 147.
Amendment 186, page 53, line 48, leave out from beginning to end of line 40 on page 54 and insert—
‘(5) The Scottish Ministers may not make an order under section 33BD unless they have consulted the Secretary of State about the proposed order.
(6) The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under section 33BD is exercisable so as to make any provision that may be made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, or vary or revoke an order made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, but only with the agreement of the Scottish Ministers.”
Government amendments 148 to 150.
Amendment 187, page 55, line 30, leave out from beginning to end of line 24 on page 56 and insert—
“(5) The Scottish Ministers may not make an order under section 41A unless they have consulted the Secretary of State about the proposed order.
(6) The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under section 41A is exercisable so as to make any provision that may be made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, or vary or revoke an order made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, but only with the agreement of the Scottish Ministers.”
Government amendments 151 to 153
Amendment 188, page 57, line 17, leave out from beginning to line 9 on page 58 and insert—
“(5) The Scottish Ministers may not make an order under section 41B unless they have consulted the Secretary of State about the proposed order.
(6) The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under section 41B is exercisable so as to make any provision that may be made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, or vary or revoke an order made by the Scottish Ministers under that section, but only with the agreement of the Scottish Ministers.”
Government amendment 154.
Amendment 189, in clause 53, page 60, leave out lines 9 to 17.
This amendment removes restrictions on the consultation process with the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament in relation to renewables incentive schemes.
Amendment 190, in clause 55, page 63, line 17, at end insert—
“() the Scottish Ministers,”.
Clause 55 as currently drafted would allow Scottish Ministers to make a reference to the Competition and Markets Authority only in the most exceptional circumstances. This amendment would enable Scottish Ministers to make a reference without the involvement of the Secretary of State.
Government amendments 129 and 133 to 136.
David Mundell
Let me begin by dealing with the specific issue of welfare funds, on which I am accepting an amendment that the SNP tabled in Committee. The Smith commission agreement stated that the devolution of welfare foods should be the subject of further discussion between the UK and Scottish Governments. This has taken place, and I am pleased that new clause 14 and consequential amendments 79, 80, 82 and 83 devolve powers to the Scottish Parliament concerning welfare foods. They will be able to abolish or amend existing schemes, which includes the nursery milk scheme and health start scheme, or make new schemes for the provision of welfare foods.
On welfare more generally, the Government are proposing a number of changes to the welfare clauses, responding to a number of comments made by Members of this House in Committee, as well as the Scottish Parliament and other stakeholders. As a result, it will be beyond doubt that the Scotland Bill fully delivers on the Smith commission agreement and that the Scottish Parliament will have significant responsibilities for areas of welfare. I was pleased to see these changes receiving a full endorsement from Gordon Brown, from the Scottish media, and indeed from all objective observers. The Scottish Government are getting responsibility for disability and carer’s benefits that were worth £2.7 billion in Scotland last year, and they will be able to deliver new benefits in all areas of devolved responsibility if they wish. Amendments 70 and 71 to clause 19 ensure that the Scottish Parliament can, if it wishes, legislate for the payment of a carer’s benefit to a person who is under 16, is in full-time education or is gainfully employed. The Scottish Government will be able to pay anyone on a reserved benefit a top-up payment. That includes being able to top up benefits such as tax credits, child benefit and universal credit.
Yvette Cooper
Does the Secretary of State not realise that he is setting up two different systems, one for Scotland and one for England and Wales, when we know from other parts of the world that that leads to women having to travel for abortions at a vulnerable time? That issue of principle—deciding whether it is right for people to have to travel—is important. I hope that many of our Scottish colleagues will agree with us about the importance of the 1967 Act. I know that there is strong agreement from the First Minister. However, there is an issue of principle in whether we think it is right to increase the likelihood of women having to travel at a vulnerable time. Does he think it is right to do that without proper consultation with women across not just Scotland, but England—
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
Order. The right hon. Lady is hoping to catch my eye. I want to hear her speech then, rather than now. Shorter interventions would be very helpful.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
Order. Members cannot just stand there waiting. I should say, in fairness to the right hon. Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper), that she gave way earlier. If she wishes to give way again, I will call whoever wishes to intervene, but Members should not stand there waiting on the off chance that she may do so. I should also say that I am sure the right hon. Lady wishes to face the Chair.
Yvette Cooper
We have been given too little time for such an important debate, so I cannot give way, but I urge Members to bear it in mind that anti-abortion campaigners want this opportunity to fragment and divide us. All of us who support the 1967 Act ought to agree that we should stand together and not allow anti-abortion campaigners to divide us, pick us off one by one, and target us differently. I urge the House to reconsider. We should consult properly, we should take the interests of women and their families into consideration, and we should vote against the new clause tonight.
Scotland Bill
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(8 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)
I beg to move amendment 16, page 1, line 7, leave out first “A” and insert “The”
The Chairman of Ways and Means (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment 37, page 1, line 7, leave out “is recognised as” and insert “shall be”.
Amendment 17, page 1, line 7, leave out “recognised as”.
Amendment 58, page 1, leave out lines 7 and 8 and insert—
‘(1A) The Scottish Parliament is a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitution.
(1B) Subsection (1) or (1A) may be repealed only if—
(a) the Scottish Parliament has consented to the proposed repeal, and
(b) a referendum has been held in Scotland on the proposed repeal and a majority of those voting at the referendum have consented to it.”
This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.
Amendment 38, page 1, line 8, at end insert
“and may not be abolished without the consent of the Scottish people given effect by an Act of the Scottish Parliament”.
Amendment 18, page 1, line 12, leave out “recognised as”.
Amendment 59, page 1, leave out lines 12 and 13 and insert—
‘(1A) The Scottish Government is a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitution.
(1B) Subsection (1) or (1A) may be repealed only if—
(a) the Scottish Parliament has consented to the proposed repeal, and
(b) a referendum has been held in Scotland on the proposed repeal and a majority of those voting at the referendum have consented to it.”
This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.
Clause 1 stand part.
Amendment 89, in clause 11, page 13, line 42, at end insert—
‘(2A) In paragraph 4 of Schedule 4 (protection of Scotland Act 1998 from modification), insert new sub-paragraph—
“(5A) This paragraph does not apply to amendments to Schedule 5, Part II, Head A, Section A1 insofar as they relate to:
(a) taxes and excise in Scotland,
(b) government borrowing and lending in Scotland, and
(c) control over public expenditure in Scotland.”
This amendment would enable the Scottish Parliament to amend the Scotland Act 1998 to remove the reservation on taxation, borrowing and public expenditure in Scotland, with the effect that the Scottish Parliament could then legislate in these areas to provide for full fiscal autonomy in Scotland.
New clause 2—Constitutional convention—
‘(1) The Prime Minister shall establish a Constitutional Convention within one month of the day on which this act is passed.
(2) The Chair and Members of the Constitutional Convention shall be appointed in accordance with a process to be laid before, and approved by, resolution in each House of Parliament.
(3) The Chair of the Constitutional Convention is not permitted to be a Member of Parliament or a member of a political party.
(4) Members of the Constitutional must include, but not be limited to, the following—
(a) members of the public, chosen by lot through the jury system, who shall comprise the majority of those participating in the convention;
(b) elected representatives at all levels;
(c) representatives of civil society organisations and, in an advisory role, academia.
(5) The Constitutional Convention shall review and make recommendations in relation to future governance arrangements for the United Kingdom, including but not limited to the following—
(a) the role and voting rights of Members of the House of Commons;
(b) democratic reform of the House of Lords;
(c) further sub-national devolution within England;
(d) codification of the constitution.
(6) The Constitutional Convention shall engage in widespread consultation across the nations and regions of the UK, and must provide a report to both Houses of Parliament by 31 March 2016.
(7) The Secretary of State must lay before both Houses of Parliament a formal response to each recommendation of the Constitutional Convention within four months of the publication of the final report from the Constitutional Convention.’
This New Clause provides an outline for a Constitutional Convention selected from the widest possible number of groups in society to analyse and design future governance arrangements for the United Kingdom, and to report by 31 March 2016.
New clause 3—Transfer of reserved matters—
‘(1) Schedule 5 (which defines reserved matters) to the Scotland Act 1998, has effect with the following modifications.
(2) In Part I (general reservations) omit paragraph 6 (political parties).
(3) Part II (specific reservations) is omitted.
(4) Insert Part IIA (UK pensions liability) as follows—
Part IIA
UK Pensions liability
The consent of the Treasury is required before the enactment of any provision passed by the Scottish Parliament which would affect the liabilities of the National Insurance Fund in respect of old age pensions.”
(5) In Part III (general provisions) the following provisions referring to Part II of the Schedule are omitted—
(a) paragraph 3(2);
(b) paragraph 4(2)(c).’
This Amendment would allow the Scottish Parliament to make provision for the registration and funding of political parties, but would otherwise retain the Part I reserved matters covering the constitution, foreign affairs, public service, defence and treason. It would entirely remove the remaining reservations over financial and economic matters, home affairs, trade and industry, energy, transport, social security, regulation of the professions, employment, health and medicines, media and culture and other miscellaneous matters. The consent of the Treasury would be needed for any changes in old age pensions which would affect the liabilities of the National Insurance Fund.
New clause 6—Constitution of Scotland—
‘(1) The 1998 Scotland Act shall be cited as The Written Constitution of Scotland.
(2) A standing Scottish Constitutional Convention shall be convened jointly by the Secretary of State and the Scottish Ministers to conduct reviews and to make recommendations to the Scottish Parliament and the Parliament of the United Kingdom.’
The New Clause renames the Scotland Act 1998 and introduces a standing Scottish Constitutional Convention.
New clause 7—Application of the Parliament Acts to the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government—
‘(1) The Parliament Act 1911 is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection 2(1), after “other than a Money Bill”, insert “or a Bill amending sections 1 or 2 of the Scotland Act 2015.’
The New Clause entrenches the permanence of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government by ensuring that changing Clauses 1 and 2 of the Bill once enacted would be possible only with the consent of both Houses of Parliament.
New clause 8—Scottish Parliament nomination of members of the House of Lords—
‘(1) The Scottish Parliament shall nominate members for appointment to the House of Lords, in a method to be determined wholly by the Scottish Parliament.
(2) The number of members of the House of Lords appointed in accordance with this section shall at any time be in broadly the same proportion to the total membership of the House of Lords as the population of Scotland is to the total population of the United Kingdom.’
The New Clause would require the Scottish Parliament to nominate members to sit in the House of Lords in proportion to Scotland’s share of the United Kingdom population.
New clause 9—Constitutional convention—
‘(1) Within one month of the day on which this Act is passed, a constitutional convention is to be held to consider and make recommendations on the constitution of the United Kingdom.
(2) The Secretary of State must make regulations to—
(a) appoint a day on which the convention must commence its operations,
(b) make fair and transparent rules about how the convention is to operate and how evidence is to be adduced,
(c) make further provision about the terms of reference prescribed under section 2, and
(d) specify how those who are to be part of the convention are to be chosen in accordance with subsection (8).
(3) The date appointed under subsection (2)(a) must not be later than 31 December 2016.
(4) A statutory instrument containing regulations under subsection (2), if made without a draft having been approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament, is subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.
(5) The convention shall have the following terms of reference—
(a) the devolution of legislative and fiscal competence to and within Scotland and the rest of the UK,
(b) the devolution of legislative and fiscal competence to local authorities within the United Kingdom,
(c) electoral reform,
(d) constitutional matters to be considered in further conventions, and
(e) procedures to govern the consideration and implementation of any future constitutional reforms.
(6) The convention must publish recommendations within the period of one year beginning with the day appointed under subsection (2)(a).
(7) The Secretary of State must lay responses to each of the recommendations from the convention before each House of Parliament within six months beginning with the day on which the recommendations are published.
(8) The convention must be composed of representatives of the following—
(a) all registered political parties within the United Kingdom,
(b) civic society and local authorities of the nations and regions of the United Kingdom.’
The New Clause would require the appointment of a convention to review the operation of the Act resulting from the Scotland Bill in the wider context of the Union.
Amendment 1, in clause 63, page 67, line 24, leave out paragraph (a).
This amendment provides that section 1 will not come into force on the day on which the Act is passed, in order to link the commencement of Part 1 of the Act (Constitutional arrangements) with the work of the Constitutional Convention, outlined in New Clause NC2, which would be required to report by 31 March 2016.
Amendment 2, page 67, line 26, at end insert—
‘(1A) Part 1 comes into force within one month of the publication of the report of the Constitutional Convention appointed under section (Constitutional Convention).”
This amendment provides that Part 1 of the Act (Constitutional arrangements) comes into force after publication of the report of the Constitutional Convention, as outlined in New Clause NC2, which would be required to report by 31 March 2016.
Mr Carmichael
Amendments 16, 17 and 18 are essentially probing amendments, authored by the Law Society of Scotland. Subject to the response that we hear from Ministers and from those in other parts of the House, it is not my intention to seek to press them to a Division.
The amendments change the nature of clause 1 from one that recognises the permanence of the Scottish Parliament to one that declares it. The genesis of the clause was the Smith commission report, which required that there should be a statement in the legislation to follow it that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government were permanent institutions. The form of words in clause 1 was inserted by the draft clauses published at the end of January, which recognised that permanence. The permanence of the Scottish Parliament is to be found not in any amendment or statutory enactment, but in the will of the Scottish people. It is a permanent institution because, frankly, it is unthinkable that it would be repealed at this point. For that reason, and given the comments of the Scottish Parliament’s Devolution (Further Powers) Committee, it is right that we should revisit the issue.
At the heart of this debate is the issue and the definition of sovereignty. The context is a classic Diceyan definition of sovereignty, which says that Parliament here is sovereign. Although matters have moved on somewhat over the years and although it remains the case that Parliament cannot bind its successors, it is undoubtedly the case that since the European Communities Act 1972 we have taken a different view of parliamentary sovereignty, one in which sovereignty is shared with the European Union, as it now is, in Brussels, the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly, the Northern Ireland Assembly and even the London Assembly. It was the subject of considerable debate during the constitutional convention back in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The view that was taken then, which as I recall was contained in the claim of right, was that in Scotland the Diceyan version of sovereignty—that Parliament is sovereign—has never been the case, and that sovereignty has always been vested in and remained with the people of Scotland. From that point of view, I see considerable merit in amendment 58 in the name of the hon. Member for Moray (Angus Robertson) and his colleagues in the Scottish National party, requiring that if there were ever to be a repeal of the Scotland Act 1998 it could be done only with the consent of a majority voting in a referendum. That honours and respects the view that sovereignty lies with the people in Scotland.
However, even that clause could be got around by a simple repeal, a consequence of the doctrine that Parliament cannot bind its successors. As long as we try to do these things by way of primary legislation, we will keep tying ourselves up in knots and any solution that we bring forward will lack permanence and will be unsatisfactory.
Pete Wishart
I am grateful for that explanation. The key issue we face in the next year is the prospect of an EU referendum being held on the same day as the Scottish parliamentary elections. Would he like to take the opportunity to say what he thinks about that and to rule it out? We cannot have 16 and 17-year-olds coming into the polling booth to vote in the Scottish Parliament election, possibly being ID-ed, and then being turned out as they cannot vote in the EU referendum.
The Chairman of Ways and Means (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
Order. We need to watch out so that we do not go outside the scope of what we are discussing. That is the danger. As much as the hon. Gentleman wants to tempt the Minister, I want him to try to stay within the scope of the Bill and to try to answer along those lines.
John Penrose
I shall endeavour to be as helpful as I can when I reach amendment 43, which is closely adjacent to the points made by the hon. Member for Perth and North Perthshire (Pete Wishart), without, I hope, trying your patience in the process, Mr Hoyle.
Clauses 3 and 5 fulfil the Smith commission agreement devolving significant electoral powers to the Scottish Parliament while ensuring that polls for Scottish parliamentary ordinary general elections will not be held on the same day as UK parliamentary general elections, European general elections or ordinary government elections, as we just discussed. The UK Government consider the timing and combination of polls to be intrinsically linked. I think that we might have covered that point, but I want to make sure that it is clear. That is why the combination of polls involving a reserved poll with a poll at a Scottish parliamentary election or local government election in Scotland continues to be reserved, as does the combination of a poll at a Scottish parliamentary ordinary general election with a poll at an ordinary local government election in Scotland. I urge Members to withdraw their amendments for the reasons that I have just given.
Amendment 43 seeks to ensure that it would not be possible for a Scottish parliamentary general election to be held on the same day as a referendum called under reserved powers. The hon. Member for Caerphilly gets top marks for ingenuity for trying to shoehorn into the Bill before us today a measure which affects tomorrow’s business. I understand that there are strong views on the issue and I promise him that we are considering them carefully. He will know that an amendment has been tabled for the business tomorrow which is very similar to this one and will allow the issue to be debated in some depth. I therefore encourage my right hon. and hon. Friends to resist the opportunity to support the amendment, if only because it would not be fair to Members of other devolved Parliaments and Assemblies, which may have elections on the same day as the Scottish elections next year, for such a measure to be dealt with in a Scottish Bill when we have the opportunity to deal with it properly tomorrow.
Joanna Cherry
I beg to move amendment 62, page 11, line 19, leave out
“the decision whether to pass or reject it”
and insert
“the motion that the Bill be passed is debated”.
Amendments 62 to 66 to Clause 10 aim to clarify matters around references to the Supreme Court, in particular where the Scottish Parliament resolve to reconsider the Bill.
The Chairman of Ways and Means (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment 21, page 11, line 27, at end add—
“(aa) the period between general elections specified in section 2(2)”.
Amendment 22, page 11, line 30, at end add—
“(ba) the alteration of boundaries of constituencies, regions, or any equivalent electoral area”.
Amendment 63, page 11, line 39, after “unless”, insert
“it is passed without division, or”.
Amendment 64, page 12, line 18, at end insert—
“(2A) He shall not make a reference by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) if the Parliament resolves that it wishes to reconsider the Bill.
(2B) He shall not make a reference by virtue of paragraph (b) of subsection (2) if—
(a) the Bill was passed without a division, or
(b) the Bill was passed on a division and the number of members voting in favour of it was at least two thirds of the total number of seats for members of the Parliament.”
This amendment establishes that a Bill passed by consensus in the Scottish Parliament (i.e. without a division) automatically meets the super-majority requirement and ensures that a Presiding Officer’s statement is not required if the super-majority requirements are not triggered.
Amendment 65, page 12, line 23, at end insert—
“(3A) Subsection (3B) applies where—
(a) a reference has been made in relation to a Bill under this section, and
(b) the reference has not been decided or otherwise disposed of.
(3B) If the Parliament resolves that it wishes to reconsider the Bill—
(a) the Presiding Officer shall notify the Advocate General, the Lord Advocate and the Attorney General of that fact, and
(b) the person who made the reference in relation to the Bill shall request the withdrawal of the reference.”
Amendment 66, page 12, line 27, leave out subsections (11) and (12) and insert—
“(10A) In subsection (4) after paragraph (a) insert—
“(aa) where section 32A(2)(b) applies—
(i) the Supreme Court decides that the Bill or any provision of the Bill relates to a protected subject matter, or
(ii) a reference has been made in relation to the Bill under section 32A and the Parliament subsequently resolves that it wishes to reconsider the Bill.”
(10B) After that subsection insert—
“(4A) Standing orders shall provide for an opportunity for the reconsideration of a Bill after its rejection if (and only if), where section 32A(2)(a) applies—
(a) the Supreme Court decides that the Bill or any provision of the Bill does not relate to a protected subject matter, or
(b) the Parliament resolves that it wishes to reconsider the Bill.””
Clause 10 stand part.
Amendment 67, in clause 11, page 13, line 4, at end insert—
“(1A) In paragraph 1 of Schedule 4 (protection of Scotland Act 1998 from modification), delete ‘(2)(f) the Human Rights Act 1998’”
This amendment would remove the Human Rights Act 1998 from the list of protected provisions in Schedule 4 of the Scotland Act 1998.
Amendment 68, page 13, line 10, paragraph (a)(ii), leave out “(3)” and insert “(2B)”.
Amendments 68 to 88 to Clause 11 would grant the Scottish Parliament powers to make decisions about all matters relating to the arrangements and operations of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government as agreed in the Smith Commission.
Amendment 69, page 13, line 11, paragraph (a)(iii), leave out “11” and insert “12”.
Amendment 70, page 13, line 12, paragraph (a)(iv), leave out from “section” to the end and insert “sections 13 to 27,”.
Amendment 71, page 13, line 13, paragraph (a)(v), leave out from “(v)” to the end and insert “section 28(1) to (6),”.
Amendment 72, page 13, line 14, paragraph (a)(vi), leave out from “(vi)” to the end and insert “sections 29(2)(e)”.
Amendment 73, page 13, line 15, paragraph (a)(vii), leave out “27(1) and (2)” and insert “31”.
Amendment 74, page 13, line 16, paragraph (a)(viii), leave out “28(5)” and insert “32(1) to (3),”.
Amendment 75, page 13, line 17, paragraph (a)(ix), leave out “(1)(a) and (b) and (2) and (3)”.
Amendment 76, page 13, line 18, paragraph (a)(x), leave out “39” and insert “38”.
Amendment 77, page 13, line 21, paragraph (b)(i), leave out “44(1B)(a) and (b), and (2)” and insert “44(1C), (2) and (4),”.
Amendment 78, page 13, line 22, paragraph (b)(ii), leave out “(3) to (7)” and insert “to 50”.
Amendment 79, page 13, line 23, paragraph (b)(iii), leave out “46(1) to (3)” and insert “51(1), (2) and (5) to (8)”.
Amendment 80, page 13, line 24, paragraph (b)(iv), leave out “47(3)(b) to (e)” and insert “52”.
Amendment 81, page 13, line 25, paragraph (b)(v), leave out “48(2) to (4)” and insert “59”.
Amendment 82, page 13, line 26, paragraph (b)(vi), leave out “49(2) and (4)(b) to (e)” and insert “61”.
Amendment 83, page 13, line 27, leave out paragraph (b)(vii).
Amendment 84, page 13, line 28, paragraph (c), leave out “(3)”.
Amendment 85, page 13, line 29, paragraph (d), leave out from “general,” to the end of the paragraph, and insert—
“(i) sections 81 to 85,
(ii) sections 91 to 95, and
(iii) section 97,”.
Amendment 86, page 13, line 31, paragraph (e), leave out from “supplementary,” to the end of the paragraph in line 37, and insert—
“(i) sections 112, 113 and 115, and Schedule 7 (insofar as those sections and that Schedule apply to any power in this Act of the Scottish Ministers to make subordinate legislation),
(ii) sections 118, 120 and 121,
(iii) section 124 (insofar as that section applies to any power in this Act of the Scottish Ministers to make subordinate legislation),
(iv) section 126(1) and (6) to (8), and
(v) section 127,”.
Government amendments 108 to 110.
Amendment 87, page 13, line 39, paragraph (g), leave out “6” and insert “7”.
Amendment 88, page 13, line 41, paragraph (h), leave out
“paragraphs 1 to 6 of”.
Clause stand part.
Joanna Cherry
I rise to speak in favour of amendments 62 and 67. Amendment 67 would introduce to clause 11 a subsection that would remove the Human Rights Act from the list of protected provisions in schedule 4 to the Scotland Act 1998.
In the debate on the Gracious Speech, the Home Secretary confirmed that a Bill will be brought forward during this Parliament to introduce a Bill of Rights and to repeal the Human Rights Act. The Scottish National party has consistently opposed repeal of the Human Rights Act. We won the election in Scotland and therefore there is no mandate from the Scottish people for repeal of the Act. None the less, the Secretary of State for Scotland has confirmed, albeit on Radio Scotland, that repeal of the Human Rights Act will apply equally in Scotland as in England. At present, the Human Rights Act is listed as a protected provision in schedule 4 to the Scotland Act, which means that the Scottish Parliament cannot modify the Human Rights Act. Amendment 67 would change that.
The UK Government have not been clear on how potential changes to the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European convention on human rights and the abolition of the Human Rights Act could impact on the place of the ECHR in Scotland’s constitutional settlement. That is important because the ECHR is entrenched in the Scotland Act. For example, section 29(2)(d) provides that a provision that is incompatible with the ECHR is outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, and section 57(2) provides that a member of the Scottish Government has no power to make any subordinate legislation or to do any act in so far as that would be incompatible with the ECHR.
Neither of those sections would be changed by simple repeal of the Human Rights Act alone. It is clear, therefore, that human rights are not specifically a reserved matter; they are partially devolved. Scottish National party Members therefore argue that any repeal of the Human Rights Act without first consulting the Scottish Parliament would violate the Sewel convention, whereby the Westminster Government will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.
Matters are further complicated by the fact that the Smith commission and the draft clauses proposed putting the Sewel convention on a legislative footing. There is therefore the prospect of a very real clash between the United Kingdom Government commitment to revise and reduce the role of the ECHR in United Kingdom law and their commitment to the Scottish electorate to implement the vow. There is a real possibility of a clash between the Scottish and Westminster Parliaments.
It is worth pausing to look at the realities of human rights in the United Kingdom and why they matter. As I said in my maiden speech, the United Kingdom in fact loses very few of the cases brought against it in Strasbourg. The United Kingdom once had a proud tradition of leading in Europe on human rights. It was elected to membership of the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2014 on a prospectus claiming that it was
“a passionate, committed and effective defender of human rights”.
Repealing the Human Rights Act would not really live up to that claim and would send out all the wrong signals. The right hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve) said in 2014 that the proposal to repeal the Human Rights Act represented a
“failure of ambition…on the global promotion of human rights”.
Human rights matter to ordinary people in this country. Those who have benefited from the Human Rights Act include victims of domestic violence, who have been able to get better protection, and victims of rape, who have used the Act to ensure that the police properly investigate offences. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people have used human rights to overcome discrimination in this country. The families of military personnel killed on active service because the Ministry of Defence supplied them with outdated equipment have also benefited under the Human Rights Act. These rights are very real for ordinary United Kingdom citizens.
In Scotland, we have a national action plan for human rights, which has been co-produced in partnership with wider civil society. We have a United Nations- accredited Scottish Human Rights Commission, which is internationally acknowledged as one of the world’s best. As I said in my maiden speech, our commitment to human rights in Scotland extends not just to the ECHR, but beyond that to social and economic rights. Through our work on social justice and challenges such as that on fair work, we are intent on ensuring that people in Scotland can enjoy their economic, social and cultural human rights. Scotland is also a world leader in its work to give full effect to the rights of children. We are very proud of that record in Scotland and we wish to protect it—hence amendment 67.
As I have said, the amendment would have the effect of removing the Human Rights Act from the list of enactments that cannot be modified by the Scottish Parliament. If the Scottish Parliament was able to modify the Human Rights Act, that would allow the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament to establish a human rights regime in Scotland regardless of whether the Act was repealed by the UK Parliament.
I hasten to add that, as our First Minister has said, the SNP is committed to opposing the repeal of the Human Rights Act for the whole of the UK, not just for Scotland. However, in the unfortunate event that it is repealed for the whole of the UK, amendment 67 would enable us to do something about it, at least in Scotland. That position has the overwhelming support of the Scottish electorate, as evidenced by the 56 out of 59 MPs sitting beside and behind me.