Draft legislation should generally set out a high degree of detail to ensure proper democratic engagement, Committee finds

A framework approach to legislation should only be used in very limited circumstances, according to Holyrood’s Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee.

In a new report, the Committee said that draft legislation in the Scottish Parliament should generally set out a high degree of detail on the face of a bill to allow for proper democratic engagement by both stakeholders and parliamentarians.

The report comes as the Committee concludes an inquiry into how framework legislation and so-called Henry VIII powers are used in Scotland and elsewhere.

There is not a single, precise definition for framework legislation. The Committee described it as legislation which sets out the principles for a policy, but without substantial detail as to how it will be given practical effect. Instead, broad powers are given to ministers or others to fill in this detail at a later stage.

While there was a lot of consensus around what this sort of legislation is in practice, the Committee recognised that, within this description, there will be a spectrum of framework provision, grey areas, and scope for reasonable disagreement.

The Committee recognised the need for framework legislation in appropriate and very limited circumstances, mainly to allow for flexibility. Although each bill needs to be considered on its own merits, flexibility is more likely to be needed in areas which need to be updated frequently, in ways which cannot reasonably be foreseen.

The Committee found that any framework provisions should be as clear and as narrow in scope as possible. Where a bill proposes the delegation of a broad power, the Scottish Government should think about using an appropriate super-affirmative procedure to improve parliamentary scrutiny of how the power is used.

Considering the balance of evidence across jurisdictions, the Committee concluded it is likely the occurrence of framework legislation has increased since 1932 when the Report of the Donoughmore Committee on Ministers’ Powers was published, and that the trend seems to be accelerating.

Framework powers that allow flexibility “just in case” are unlikely to be considered appropriate, the Committee also found, and consultation and “co-design” on a bill’s provisions should take place before it is introduced to enable sufficient policy detail to be provided.

Stuart McMillan MSP, Convener of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, said: “Proper scrutiny is vital to the work of the Scottish Parliament to improve the quality of legislation and ensure that laws are well considered and effective.

“Our Committee agreed that, where possible, parliamentarians and stakeholders should be able to engage with solid proposals to make it easier for them to consider the impact of legislation, set out views or advocate for a particular outcome.

“Where a framework approach is being taken, we see it as essential that a full justification is given at the bill’s introduction as to why the framework provision is appropriate in the circumstances.

“We hope our report is useful, by sharing our views on how to strengthen the scrutiny of primary legislation that delegates framework powers, and the secondary legislation made under them.

“We are keen to hear the Scottish Government’s response to our report.”

As part of its inquiry, the Committee was also interested in hearing views of how Henry VIII powers are used. These powers allow Ministers to amend primary legislation by secondary legislation

The Committee concluded that Henry VIII powers can be a necessary, efficient tool when used suitably but should be appropriately limited in scope.

Bill “must be used” to empower judicial factors to help the families of missing people

The Scottish Parliament’s Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee has welcomed the proposals in the Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill, which aims to consolidate and update laws related to judicial factors.

However, the opportunity for the Bill to clarify how judicial factors can work with the families of missing people cannot be missed, according to the Committee’s report.

A judicial factor is a person appointed by the court to gather in, hold, safeguard, and administer property, which is not being, or would not otherwise be, properly managed. At present, most judicial factors are solicitors or accountants.

The position has existed for hundreds of years, with the substantive law in the area currently dating back to 1849 and 1889. The Bill also repeals even older court rules, including an Act of Sederunt from 1690.

Through its consideration of the Bill, the Committee has come to appreciate the vital role that judicial factors are able to play in many circumstances including working with solicitors’ firms in certain circumstances, businesses, when partnerships which break down and the estates of deceased people, when needed.

In particular, the Committee has made recommendations which it believes would clarify how a judicial factor can help in cases of missing people. The ability of a judicial factor to step in and manage the affairs of a loved one is a key point raised in the Committee’s report.

To make it clear that judicial factors can be appointed in such cases, the Committee has recommended the inclusion of an explicit statement in the Bill that it is competent to appoint a judicial factor to the estate of a missing person.

The Committee’s report also supports work to improve advertising, guidance and advice to make the Bill more accessible for families and legal professionals who are looking after the estates of missing people.

Stuart McMillan MSP, Convener of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee said: “Most people in Scotland may not be familiar with judicial factors or their work, but during our evidence sessions we were able to learn more about their vital role.

“We are broadly content with the proposals in the Bill, which will update the laws around judicial factors that date back hundreds of years and bring welcome clarity.

“However, we do believe that these updates present the Parliament with an opportunity to go further to really ensure that judicial factors work for the loved ones of people who go missing.”

The Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill was introduced in response to recommendations made by the Scottish Law Commission.

It is anticipated that the Parliament will consider the Bill in a Stage 1 debate this autumn.

MSPs to examine use of emergency rule-making powers

The Scottish Parliament’s Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee is beginning an inquiry looking at the Scottish Government’s use of emergency regulation making powers.

The regulation making power, known as the ‘made affirmative procedure’, has been used over 100 times by the Scottish Government since the start of the pandemic. While the legal mechanism existed before, it was only used a handful of times in a year.

The made affirmative procedure means that legal changes come into force before MSPs have a chance to look at or vote on them, allowing the Government to act quickly. The Parliament does however need to approve the changes within 28 days for the law to stay in force.

The Parliament gave the Scottish Government more ability to use these powers in the Coronavirus Acts, originally passed in April and May 2020. The UK Coronavirus Act also allows for the procedure to be used in the UK Parliament and devolved legislatures.

The committee hopes to help the Parliament ensure an appropriate balance between flexibility for the Government in responding to an emergency situation while still ensuring proper parliamentary scrutiny and oversight.

Committee Convener, Stuart McMillan MSP, said: “There are good public health reasons to ensure the Scottish Government can act quickly to keep people safe. The Committee recognises that use of the made affirmative procedure has allowed the Scottish Government to respond quickly to the many challenges presented by the pandemic.

“But our Committee wants to ensure the power to do so is used appropriately and necessarily.

“Whenever possible, MSPs should have proper opportunities for oversight, and the public have opportunities to engage and comment on proposals before they come into force. This is a cornerstone of our democracy in Scotland.

“We will consider how the power is currently being used by the Scottish Government and make any recommendations for changes we find necessary.”