���˿���

The instrument amends the requirements and restrictions that affect international travellers arriving in Scotland. A number of issues have been raised on the instrument. I will cover each in turn.

First, regulation 7 amends the principal international travel regulations to insert regulation 16A, which requires eligible vaccinated arrivals to report the outcome of a day 2 lateral flow device test, and to insert regulation 16B, which requires such people to take a confirmatory test from a public provider if their lateral flow test result is positive. Neither the principal regulations nor this instrument specifies that the confirmatory test should be a PCR—polymerase chain reaction—test, although the policy note and Scottish Government guidance indicate that the confirmatory test should be a PCR test.

Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground (h), on the basis that the meaning of the instrument could be clearer that the confirmatory test that is taken by an eligible vaccinated arrival following a positive day 2 lateral flow device test must be a PCR test? In so doing, does the committee wish to call on the Scottish Government to amend new regulation 16B of the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel and Operator Liability) (Scotland) Regulations 2021 to define the term “confirmatory test” at the next legislative opportunity?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Secondly, the policy note and the letter to the Presiding Officer that accompany the instrument state that the amended definition of World Health Organization list vaccines in regulation 3 comes into force at 4 am on 10 January 2022, alongside the changes to the list of relevant countries that can provide acceptable vaccination certification in schedule 1A. However, regulation 1 provides that regulation 3 came into force at 4 am on the earlier date of 7 January.

The Scottish Government confirmed that the commencement of regulation 3 on 7 January is an error. The change should have been implemented in Scotland at the same time as in England, on 10 January. As a result, it is possible that some travellers may have been classed as eligible vaccinated arrivals in Scotland sooner than intended.

Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground (i), on the basis that its drafting appears to be defective?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Finally, the instrument is in breach of laying requirements in section 30(2) of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010, which provides that an instrument not subject to the negative or affirmative procedure must be laid before the Scottish Parliament as soon as practicable after the legislation is made, and in any event before the legislation is due to come into force. Regulations 1 to 5, 8, 9, 12 and 13 came into force at 4 am on 7 January, and the instrument came into force at 9.30 am later the same day.

Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground (j), on the basis that it fails to comply with the laying requirements?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Also under this agenda item, no technical points have been raised on the following instrument.

The instrument provides for the removal of the capacity limits on live events outdoors and removes the requirement for 1m physical distancing at outdoor event venues, outdoor exhibitions and outdoor spaces in sports stadia. It also amends the definition of the term “fully vaccinated” to introduce booster vaccinations.

Is the committee content with the instrument?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

A number of issues were raised with the Scottish Government on the instrument. First, do members wish to report the following three errors on the general reporting ground? The first is that the definition of “EU withdrawal agreement” in regulation 2 is unnecessary, given that a definition of the term that is contained in schedule 1 to the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 already applies.

The second error is that regulation 17(4)(b) refers to

“a child in respect of whom a person listed in paragraph (2)(a) has a relationship equivalent to those listed under the law of Scotland”,

and should instead refer to paragraph (3)(a) of regulation 17.

The third error is that the definitions of “civil partnership” and

“person who is living with another person as if they were in a civil partnership”

in regulation 17(4) are unnecessary in so far as they refer specifically to same-sex couples, on the basis that both same-sex and mixed-sex couples may enter into marriages and civil partnerships.

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Secondly, do members wish to report the following three errors on reporting ground (h), on the basis that the meaning could be clearer? The first error is that regulation 7(2) relates to how an individual’s ability to carry out both daily living and mobility activities is to be determined, and therefore that regulation 7(2)(a) should refer to both the tables in schedule 1, at part 2, on “Daily Living Activities”, and part 3, on “Mobility Activities”.

The second error is that the meaning of the term “medical treatment” as defined in regulations 2 and 16 could be clearer, and that the definition in regulation 2 could be removed.

The third error is that the meaning of “qualifying services” in regulation 2 within the definition of “residential educational establishment”, and in regulations 27(4) and 27(5)(b), and 32(3) and 32(4)(b) could be clearer.

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Additionally, do members wish to call on the Government to lay an amending instrument to rectify the errors in regulation 7(2)(a) and in respect of the term “medical treatment” as defined in regulation 2 before the instrument comes into force on 21 March 2022? Furthermore, do members wish to call on the Government to rectify in that amending instrument the other errors that the committee has identified?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Also under this agenda item, no points have been raised on the following draft instruments.

Is the committee content with the instruments?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

The instrument is one of a series of instruments that amend the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel and Operator Liability) Regulations 2021. Usual drafting practice requires that each amending instrument in a series should reflect the title of the principal regulations that it amends and should include a number indicating the number of Scottish statutory instruments amending the principal instrument in that year. However, when referring to the principal regulations, the title of this instrument refers to “Public Health” rather than “Health Protection”. The Scottish Government has confirmed that that was an error.

The next correctly designated instrument amending the consolidated international travel regulations is also numbered 13. The number in the title of further amending instruments will therefore not accurately reflect the number of instruments that have amended the international travel regulations in 2021. The Scottish Government confirmed that it does not propose to amend the citation provision in regulation 1 of the instrument, because that could cause further confusion. Instead, it will draw users’ attention to the instrument in footnotes in subsequent instruments, where appropriate.

Does the committee agree to report the instrument on the general reporting ground, in respect of a failure to follow proper drafting practice in the title of the instrument?

Mr Simpson wishes to comment.

Under agenda item 2, we are considering instruments subject to the affirmative procedure. No points have been raised on the following draft instruments.

Is the committee content with the instruments?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Finally, under agenda item 4, we are considering instruments not subject to parliamentary procedure. An issue has been raised on the following instrument.

The instrument amends the Act of Sederunt (Summary Applications, Statutory Applications and Appeals etc Rules) 1999 and the Act of Sederunt (Sheriff Appeal Court Rules) 2015. Paragraphs 3(2) and 3(3) insert new rules into the sheriff appeal court rules referring to an appeal under section 38(3), 44(3) and 67(3) of the Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019.

The committee identified an error due to an inconsistency in the cross-referencing in paragraphs 3(2) and 3(3) of the instrument. In correspondence, the Lord President’s private office explained that the reference to section 44(3) of the 2019 act should instead be to section 46(3) of that act, and it has committed to rectifying the error at the earliest appropriate opportunity.

Does the committee agree to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on the general reporting ground in respect of the incorrect cross-reference? Also, does the committee welcome that the Lord President’s private office has committed to rectifying the error at the earliest appropriate opportunity?

I have one other point that I would like to highlight. In the information that we have received, the Lord President’s office has suggested that it is acting urgently in relation to the instrument that the Scottish Government brought in to change the age of criminal responsibility. Bearing in mind that the act was passed in 2019, clearly, there will have been communications between the Scottish Government and the Lord President’s private office in the period since then. I suggest that the committee writes to the Scottish Government and the Lord President’s private office to seek clarity on the communications that took place before the introduction of the instrument that the Scottish Government brought forward and on the situation that we have today. Is the committee agreed?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed on those points.

Also under this agenda item, no points have been raised on the following instrument.

Welcome to the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee’s 15th meeting in session 6, which is taking place fully online. As we are meeting online, it will be more challenging for members to indicate agreement to the items that are discussed. I therefore ask members to raise your hand if you are not content with a question that is put or if you wish to speak about an instrument.

The first item of business is consideration of an instrument subject to the made affirmative procedure, on which an issue has been raised.