This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26744783
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Committee of MSPs takes evidence on Holyrood scrutiny | |
(1 day later) | |
MSPs have started taking evidence on whether Holyrood is rushing through legislation without proper scrutiny. | |
Concerns had been lodged by two parliamentary committees that there was not enough time to consider the impact of late amendments. | Concerns had been lodged by two parliamentary committees that there was not enough time to consider the impact of late amendments. |
Now the Scottish Procedures and Public Appointments Committee (SPPA) is investigating possible rule changes. | Now the Scottish Procedures and Public Appointments Committee (SPPA) is investigating possible rule changes. |
It comes after a row about the recent passage of the Children and Young People Bill. | It comes after a row about the recent passage of the Children and Young People Bill. |
MSPs were concerned they would have to pass the legislation before detailed costings for new childcare measures had been provided. | MSPs were concerned they would have to pass the legislation before detailed costings for new childcare measures had been provided. |
The convenors of the two committees that had complained about lack of scrutiny spoke to the SPPA. | |
The SNP's Nigel Don leads the delegated powers and law reform committee and the SNP's Kenneth Gibson heads the finance committee. | The SNP's Nigel Don leads the delegated powers and law reform committee and the SNP's Kenneth Gibson heads the finance committee. |
Evidence also came from Labour MSP Claudia Beamish. | |
Ahead of the committee meeting, Ms Beamish and fellow MSPs, Tory Alex Fergusson and Lib Dem Tavish Scott, submitted a written statement saying that late amendments created "considerable issues of confidence in parliamentary scrutiny". | Ahead of the committee meeting, Ms Beamish and fellow MSPs, Tory Alex Fergusson and Lib Dem Tavish Scott, submitted a written statement saying that late amendments created "considerable issues of confidence in parliamentary scrutiny". |
They cited the Stage 3 debate on the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill in which three sets of amendments were introduced. | They cited the Stage 3 debate on the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill in which three sets of amendments were introduced. |
New bill | New bill |
The MSPs explained: "They had not, as the minister responsible for the bill acknowledged, been subject to any previous parliamentary scrutiny. | The MSPs explained: "They had not, as the minister responsible for the bill acknowledged, been subject to any previous parliamentary scrutiny. |
"They have not been subject to any public consultation but were accepted by parliament. | "They have not been subject to any public consultation but were accepted by parliament. |
"The opposition parties did not oppose the amendments but registered their disquiet on the procedure followed by the government by abstaining." | "The opposition parties did not oppose the amendments but registered their disquiet on the procedure followed by the government by abstaining." |
They added: "Parliament's committees are frequently held up as the legislative strength of the Scottish Parliament. | They added: "Parliament's committees are frequently held up as the legislative strength of the Scottish Parliament. |
"However, in the absence of any mechanism for revision, apart from a completely new bill, the tabling of the new Stage 3 amendments without any scrutiny or public consultation appears to us to create considerable issues of confidence in parliamentary scrutiny." | "However, in the absence of any mechanism for revision, apart from a completely new bill, the tabling of the new Stage 3 amendments without any scrutiny or public consultation appears to us to create considerable issues of confidence in parliamentary scrutiny." |
Previous version
1
Next version