 Gweithio, mae'r cyntaf o'r gweithio i gynnwys y ddigon cymdeithasri yn 2016. Rodd Bynedd wedi gweld gwneud y gynnwys. Mae'n gynhwys yma o'r adegau. Mae'n gŷnol ar gyfer amddangol yn ei gynnwys. Mae'n cefnodol yma ar gyfer amdano yn hwnnw ar gyfer. ac mae'n mynd i weld i'r adeiladau eich buff Ells Vitleyd. A syml ni'n gweithio i fy mil yng Nghymru. Ar y cwestiwch, dyma ddim yn ysgolod, sy'n cymorth i fy miliadau, wedi'u bod nhw'n vivos, ac mae'n achos rydych chi'n eich peithio. Ford, Annabelle Ewing, Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, ac i fy modd ymgyrchol i gael nhw derbyn ni ysgolod y Mhlygелau Diolch, on the draft legal aid Scotland act 1986 amendment regulations 2016. With the minister this morning is Denise Swanson, head of the access to justice unit and Alistair Smith from the directorate of legal services at the Scottish government. I just remind members that this is an affirmative instrument and officials are permitted to give evidence under this item, but not to precipitate in the formal debate at the end of agenda item 3. Can I refer members to paper 1, which is a note by the clerk, and ask the minister to make a short opening statement? Good morning and thank you, convener. I am very pleased to be here today to move the regulations, the legal aid Scotland act 1986 amendment regulations 2016. Those regulations make provision for legal aid to be available in the new upper tribunal for Scotland, which we discussed last week. The regulations will enable legal aid to be available when the first of the jurisdictions covering housing matters transfers to the Scottish tribunals on the first of December 2016. As the two housing jurisdictions that are transferring in to the Scottish tribunals currently have legal aid available to them in an appeal to the sheriff court, a commitment was made to lay those regulations to allow the status quo to continue and to ensure, therefore, that access to justice could be delivered. Thank you. Are there any questions from members, Oliver? Thank you, convener. I understand the law society of Scotland welcomed the proposals, but they raised the question over what fees would be available for the work. Is there a plan to bring forward the regulation in relation to the fees and when do you expect that to happen? Well, I thank the member for his question. In fact, the regulation for the fees to be applicable, and we are now the 4 October, and we are hoping that that will be in place so that legal aid will be available come the first of December to maintain the status quo so that the fees will be the existing fees. I believe that there is a negative instrument on this morning's agenda on those fees. Fair to the negative agenda and maybe some information that came in yesterday, minister. It was a business and regulator impact assessment and I understand that there was a draft and the draft was changed and it was under the second part of the legal aid provision. Current legal aid provision makes civil legal aid available for appeals. Previously, it had been appeals in judicial review from a tribunal. Do you like to clarify just exactly? Thank you for giving me the opportunity to do that, convener. There will be, in due course, legal aid available for judicial reviews when the judicial review mechanism transfers to the upper tribunal. At the moment, the Lord President had felt that we should let the upper tribunal, the new tribunal structure, bed in before the judicial review function was moved from, in the first instance, the court of session to the new tribunal structure. That is why we have not brought forward the legal aid provision to cover that transfer in due course today, but that will be brought forward to do that when the judicial review structure transfers from the court of session to the upper tribunal. It was not a case of it not being a formal proceeding judicial review. Was not anything to do with the terminology? My understanding is that it was simply to allow the new structure to bed in and maintain the judicial review mechanism in the court of session in the first instance, as we have it present. That was my understanding unless officials wish to flag up anything. The judicial review will not be dealt with in the upper tribunal at the moment, so there is no need to make legal aid available for that process. Legal aid is available for appeals. Every judicial review that will be dealt with in the court of session, when that process transfers to the upper tribunal, the legal aid provisions will be made at that time. I suppose that the bottom line is that there is no change in the legal aid provision for judicial review at this time, that is correct. Are there any other questions from members? If not, then minister, do you want to make a closing statement? No, thank you. If not, then we will move straight to the debate, which is the formal considering of the consideration of the motion in relation to the affirmative instrument. The motion is that motion S5M-01596, that the Justice Committee recommends that the legal aid Scotland Act 1986 amendment regulations 2016 be approved. Minister, can you move the motion? No, thank you. Any members want to say anything? I do not work quite happy with that. I put the question that we are agreed, the motion 01596, in the name of Annabel Ewingby, be approved. Are we agreed? Thank you. That concludes consideration of the affirmative instruments. The committee report will not confirm the outcome of this debate. In the meantime, can I invite committee to agree to delegate authority to myself as convener to clear the final draft of the report? I will be happy to be content with that, thank you. I want to thank the minister and officials for attending and call for a brief suspension. The fourth item of business today is consideration of two negative SSIs, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service Framework Order 2016 SSI, 2016 oblique 249 and Civil Legal Aid Scotland Miscellaneous Amendments Regulations 2016 SSI, 2016 oblique 257. I refer members to paper 2 and ask if you have any comments. The committee has agreed that it does not waste to make any recommendations in relation to those instruments. That is correct. Item number five on the agenda today is consideration of two instruments that are not subject to any parliamentary procedure. They are the act of sedent, simple procedure 2016 SSI, 2016 oblique 200, the act of sedent, lay representation for non-natural persons 2016 SSI, 2016 oblique 243. We do not normally take no procedure instruments, but the clerk's paper explains why it was thought that they should be placed on the agenda. Usually, that is for one or two reasons. Either there has been drafting issues or there has been a kind of change of policy that we think is worth noting. Could I have any comments on those two SSIs with the drafting errors? I think that if we look at our papers, the first thing that comes to mind is that they are in fact riddled with fairly careless sometimes and then moving to more substance of drafting errors. In one case, it potentially changes the meaning or causes confusion. We would most certainly want to draw attention to that and have that on record. I welcome the fact that one of the errors will be fixed to have no effect on the operation. However, a number of errors appear on the briefing that we have before us will remain to be fixed at a later date. I think that my interest in this is always that we try and extract a date that that means rather than it simply being open-ended. I am not in any sense doubting the Lord President's private office's willingness to make the changes, but I think that it would be helpful focus to them if they think about it and give us a date. I do not suggest when that date is. That is for them. I can note that and perhaps we can write a letter just asking that. That was an issue that came up fairly regularly in the last session, as John will know. I thought it important to continue those. We do not expect them to come too often to committee, but I think that it is important to make comment. Those were particularly bad examples, so I think that we are sending out a very clear message that we are at best disappointed with just what has been put in front of us and we hope that this was not something that was going to continue. If there are no other comments on these instruments, we now move into private session.