成人快手

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 20 June 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2042 contributions

|

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

I am not really sure whether that was a yes or a no; I think that it was a no.

Convener, I have not touched on the local authorities instrument. If somebody else wants to pick up on that, that is fine, but I am happy to ask about that instrument if you want.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

Bring in Bill Kidd. My question was on the other instrument.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

Thank you.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Instruments subject to Made Affirmative Procedure

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

That was a very useful session that we had with the Deputy First Minister just now.

The instrument deals with a number of areas. I could be content with some of them, but there is one that I am really not comfortable with, which is the power to close student accommodation and boarding accommodation. As we heard during the earlier discussion, the power has never been used during the entire pandemic鈥攖he Government has relied on guidance鈥攕o I can see no justification for hanging on to it for another six months. I do not think that Mr Swinney made a compelling argument for doing so. If the Government did not use a power鈥攚hich was an emergency power鈥攄uring the height of the pandemic, I can see no justification for hanging on to it now that we are in a much better place than we have been.

The instrument throws up the issue of what happens when we, as parliamentarians, are asked to approve instruments that contain a number of provisions, some of which we like and some of which we do not. There needs to be some flexibility in the system to allow us all to pick and choose. If that could be reported to the lead committee, that would be useful.

On the basis that I do not like one of the provisions, I will vote against the instrument, but I would much rather have the ability to pick off any provisions that I do not like. However, that option is unfortunately not available to us. On that basis, I will vote against it.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

So this just gives people the option to register a death remotely.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

Okay. I thought that it might be useful to go through the instrument in question, which contains a number of provisions, and to hear your thoughts on each of them. I might not cover them all, but I will go through them quickly. Some are quite straightforward.

The first provision relates to the ability to register deaths and stillbirths remotely. Does that give people a choice? Does it have to be done remotely, or can people still pop into an office to register a death or stillbirth in person?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

The instrument gives councils a power over public outdoor spaces, and we could describe parks in that way. Why would councils need powers to do anything in public outdoor spaces for the next six months?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Evidence

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

You have not, however, used those powers.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Instruments subject to Affirmative Procedure

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

Graham Simpson

As we heard earlier, the instrument extends the powers given to councils for another six months in relation to premises, events and public outdoor spaces. Given where we are with the health situation, I cannot see a justification for councils hanging on to those powers for another six months. In the circumstances, I will vote against the instrument.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 22 February 2022

Graham Simpson

Far from the minister saying that she will be prepared to, or could, call in schemes or direct councils on what the charges should be, she is clearly not prepared to do that.

She mentioned Nottingham, which is a very interesting example. Nottingham is about to increase what it charges companies. The reason for that鈥攖he minister, probably, and Mr Ruskell, certainly, will rejoice at this鈥攊s that the money that is taken in by the Nottingham scheme has gone down, because fewer people need parking spaces. Mr Ruskell will think that that is a good thing. However, in order to fill the gap, the council is increasing the charges. That leads us to the conclusion that, in Nottingham, the example so lauded by some people around this table, the charge is actually a money-making scheme.

If the minister wants to press ahead with the scheme, she should at least fix the cap element of the regulations. I am sure that she could do that.

Exemptions have been mentioned, and the Scottish Police Federation made some very strong comments about that. Calum Steele, its general secretary, fears that the charge could be passed on to rank-and-file police officers. However, if it were not to be passed on to them, it could hit overstretched police budgets.

Unions have come out against the scheme. Keir Greenaway, senior organiser for GMB Scotland, said that the lowest-paid workers would suffer at the worst possible time, with the rising cost of living. He is absolutely right.

As I pointed out two weeks ago, more than half of the employers in Nottingham have passed the parking levy, which is set to be nearly 拢500 a year per parking space, on to their staff. Some of those staff will be low paid. The scheme is a regressive tax.