 Mae'r ffordd薰ер o'r ffaith. Felly â chael iawn, yn gweithio y Gymraeg o'r Feth eich felly'r gefnogaeth o'r Llyfrladid a heddiw i'r Feth 17. Efallai yma ar y canfod y Dweud yw yng ngyfion Ryfion, mae'r sgwyrdechydd mewn hwn derbyn ar y casgr. A fawr a fawr a'r ffaith a'r dweud yn gweithio ymddangos llas i ddiddoriadau ar y casgr, a ffawr eich ddiddoriadau ar y casgr, cyfonddiwyd i'r Cyfonddiwyd y Fathrych ac i'r oficiau i gyd-doedd. Yr oficiau flankwll raioco, Colin Brown, sy'n cymryd bunsysgladau Sir Michael Helin Clyfford, ysbydd o'r lleiwyr ysbydd i'r lleiwyr ysbydd, Ferry, ysbydd o'r Cysylltu Paisol, ac rwyf yn gwybod Dylan Cross, ysbydd ladw wahanol... Ysbydd nifer o ddwyledig, am y cyfnodau newydd mewn ydych chi, rwy'n cyddiemach eich hwn cyfrodd, yn ôl i'r cynhyrchu hwnnw. mae'n gottenys. Mae'n gweithio i gael ei ffordd dyfodol sefydliadol rhyw ffordd ffordd unigol. Rwy'n ei ffordd wedi eu tryd yn rwy'r byw. Felly, rydym yn cychyd yn gymryd, rydyn ni'n llawer y mae'n cymdeithas. Maen nhw'n ochr i chi, rydyn ni'n cyn障 i chi amazingydd. Rydyn ni'n cynnig yn gyfel modd pethau allanfaith. Felly yda i chi ddechrau sy'n gweithio i chi oedd ffaith y Pwg wrth ydiol. Rydyn ni'n gweithio i chi gael eu corff aceitio i chi oedd ymryd, of Information and Exemptions. I call amendment 1 in the name of John Swinney, grouped with amendments 5-13, the Minister for Parliamentary Business to move amendment 1 and speak to all amendments in the group. Good morning. The amendments in this group arise from the ongoing discussions that we have had with stakeholders. As the committee is aware, the Government has worked closely with electoral administrators, the electoral commission and others to ensure that the provisions of the bill are workable, and the amendments in this group are technical amendments aimed at improving the bill's provisions on protection of information relating to those aged under 16. Amendments 1 and 8 address an issue raised in evidence given by the Scottish Assessors Association and the Information Commissioner's Office, which is the pre-printing of voter information on the annual household inquiry form. Pre-printing of information on the canvas form is standard practice and has been shown to improve registration rates. Amendment 8 therefore makes it clear that one of the very limited ways in which a young person's information can be used is on the pre-populated canvas form. However, that will be subject to restrictions set out in amendment 1. Amendment 1 provides that where an electoral registration officer is pre-populating a canvas form and the details of anyone who believes to be living at a particular household, the date of birth of anyone under the age of 16 must not be included. That response to concerns raised by both the Information Commissioner's Office and the Scottish Assessors Association about pre-population and strengthens the protection on young voters' information. Amendments 5, 7, 9 and 10 all relate to absent voter records and lists that are kept by electoral registration officers in relation to local government elections. Those are the postal voters list, the list of proxies and the proxy voter lists. Under normal procedures, EROs periodically circulated those lists to various persons usually ahead of an election. Those amendments put beyond doubt that the information contained in those lists is included within the definition of young person's information set out in section 12 of the bill so that the information on the records and lists will be subject to the stringent protections set out in sections 12 and 13 of the bill. Those amendments have been developed following detailed discussions with electoral registration officers. Amendments 6 and 11 are drafting amendments to provide consistency in the reference to young persons in section 13. Amendment 12 addresses an issue raised by the electoral commission during stage 1 around checking the permissibility of donations or loans. Political parties and candidates are required to check that donations over a certain value come from a permissible donor, as defined in section 54 of the political parties elections and referendum act 2000. Similarly, that act provides that any loans made to political parties must be by an authorised participant, which is defined as being a permissible donor within the meaning of section 54. That section provides that among other things, in order to be a permissible donor, the individual must be on an electoral register in the UK, which includes being on a register as an attainer. Because the bill controls on the availability of information of those aged under 16, the electoral commission commented that a mechanism would need to be put in place to allow their permissibility as donors or lenders to be checked, a point subsequently picked up by this committee in your stage 1 report. Section 13.5 of the bill already provides that the EROs are permitted to disclose a young person's information to the young person themselves. That amendment will require the registration officer to do so if the individual requests it for the purpose of verifying that they are a permissible donor under the terms of section 542A of the political parties elections and referendum act 2000. As a result of his bill, 16 and 17-year-olds will be able to appoint and act as proxy voters. As part of the normal electoral practice, electoral registration officers need to be able to write to anyone appointed as a proxy to confirm their appointment. The proxy will also need to be supplied with the elector's name, address and electoral number as part of the proxy poll card. Amendment 13 therefore adds a new section into section 13 of the bill to create further exemption to the general prohibition of disclosing a young person's information by allowing that information to be disclosed to a person appointed by them to vote as their proxy. Convener, those amendments are the result of a continued constructive engagement with stakeholders that are aimed at ensuring that the package of measures contained within the bill strike an appropriate balance between the protection of sensitive information on young voters and the need for transparency, integrity and efficacy of the registration system. I believe that with those amendments, the bill achieves that balance as far as possible and I recommend them to the committee. I therefore move amendment 1. Does any committee member have any comments? I think that you have in fact answered the question that I had that relates to amendment 13 on first reading. I found myself thinking, why would that be necessary? But are you suggesting that this is so that it is possible to put that information in the paperwork that would be issued to the proxy? Thank you very much. Likewise, on amendment 13, for clarity, I was keen to understand how narrow or wide the range of circumstances are where a person whose details are protected here because they are under 16 is in a position to appoint a proxy to vote for them on election. Is that simply in relation to a person who attends the age of 16 within a number of weeks of the election date? Secondly, on amendment 12, that inserts a new clause in relation to the supply of a young person's information. It is in terms of that the registration officer must supply this information. The previous point, the previous clause in the same section, a young person's information may be disclosed to the person whom it relates, does not have the same mandatory force clearly as must at request, and I wonder if there is an explanation or if we should read any significance into the difference between may and must in those two parts. The difference between may and must is very important because previously it could be produced and now it must be produced at the request of the young person. That is about enabling young people to participate in the election electoral process fully, while still ensuring that their details are entirely protected. On amendment 13, that is very specific circumstances and at the request of the young person. If I may come back, convener, my point on 13 was more about what the application of this is likely to be given that a young person, at the point that their details are protected, they are under the age of 16, they are clearly not in a position to vote at an election at that point, and therefore the appointment of a proxy is this in relation to people attaining just prior to the election? Sorry, so I understand your question now. It is only when they would be able to vote on the election coming up, so in the few weeks beforehand, when that fuller register is produced. The question is that amendment 1 be agreed to, are we all agreed? Yes. Amendment 1 is agreed to. The question is that section 2 be agreed, are we all agreed? The question is that sections 3 and 4 be agreed to, are we all agreed? We now come to the group applications for registration statement, where date of birth is not required and use of online service by under 16s. I call amendment 2, in the name of John Swinney, group with amendment 3, Minister for Parliamentary Business, to move amendment 2 and speak to both amendments in the group. Amendments 2 and 3 relate to individual applications for registration. Amendment 2 concerns the current requirement for an applicant to select the age group that applies to them if they do not know their date of birth. Under current rules, an individual in such circumstances would be asked to tick a box on their application form saying whether they are over 18 or under 18 in order to determine their eligibility to vote. Because the bill requires that applications from under 16s are handled in a different way from those aged 16 and 17, the Electoral Commission and Electoral Registration Officers have requested that a third age category be added to the application form. This amendment therefore provides that when a person cannot provide their date of birth, they should be asked whether they are under 16, 16 or 17 or 18 or over. That will allow an Electoral Registration Officer to determine how to progress an application form from a person if they are unable to supply their date of birth. Amendment 3 is a minor amendment that removes the current Disapplication of Registration 269 of the Representation of the People of Scotland Regulation 2001 at section 5 to be of the bill. That relates to applications to registers submitted by those aged under 16. That regulation was initially disapplied in the bill because it was unclear at that point the extent to which those aged under 16 would be able to use the individual Electoral Registration Digital Service to submit an application for registration. The digital service has been developed by Cabinet Office to receive and verify applications for registration, in particular by allowing checks of names, dates of birth and national insurance numbers against Government databases. As most of those aged under 16 will not have a national insurance number, their details cannot be verified through the digital service. The bill, as introduced, therefore prevented them using its online application system. The Scottish Government has, however, since agreed with the Cabinet Office that 14 and 15-year-olds will be able to enter their details online through the digital service, the details will then be passed to the Electoral Registration Officer for verification and be treated as an application for registration. The digital service will therefore act as a conduit for young voters' details, giving young voters access to the same online application system as older voters. Amendment 3 is required to ensure that what is provided by 14 and 15-year-olds online can be treated as an application to register. The Scottish Government officials have been in regular contact with the Cabinet Office to ensure that the questions that those under 16 are asked when using the online system and the information that they are given properly explains the general arrangements for the provisions and use of that information. Those amendments are aimed at streamlining the registration process and ensuring that the application forms and online systems work well for the voter and the electoral administrators. I therefore move amendments 2 and 3. The question is that amendment 2 be agreed to or all agreed to. Amendment 2 is agreed to. I call amendment 3 in the name of John Swinney. I already debated with amendment 2, Minister for Parliamentary Business, to move formally. The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to or all agreed to. Amendment 3 is agreed to. The question is that section 5 be agreed to or all agreed to. The question is that section 611 be agreed to or all agreed to. We come to the group indication and combined registers of attainment of age of 18. I call amendment 4 in the name of John Swinney and a group on its own. Minister for Parliamentary Business, to move and speak to amendment 4. Amendment 4 responds to an issue raised during stage 1 evidence by the Scottish courts and tribunal services. As the committee is aware, existing legislation provides for an annual publication of electoral registers on or after 1 December each year. That legislation further provides that, so far as possible, the Westminster register and the local Government register should be combined. Those combined registers are used by a range of groups and individuals, including political parties, the Electoral Commission and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service. 16 and 17-year-old attainers are currently included on the published register which show their date of attainment of age 18. Under the proposals of this bill, as all 16 and 17-year-olds will be entitled to vote at Scottish Parliament and local Government elections, the local Government register and the combined register will contain details of all 16 and 17-year-olds, i.e. not just those who will turn 18 during the life of the register. That would mean that there will be a group of 16-year-olds appearing on the combined register who are not old enough to be Westminster attainers but will, of course, be eligible to be local government or Scottish Parliament electors. Without this amendment, they would appear on the combined register without a date of attainment and would therefore appear to be over 18. That could have implications for those who use the register but who need to know whether or not the individual has attained the age of 18, for example the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, who need that information to establish eligibility for duty service. We have therefore agreed with the Electoral Registration Officers that the most practical way forward is for the combined register to include the dates of attainment of age 18 for all 16 and 17-year-olds. Amendment 4 achieves that. The Deputy First Minister indicated this planned approach during the stage 1 debate and I believe that it is a sensible solution to a potential area of confusion. It is probably important to reiterate that no details of anyone under the age of 16 will be included on those published combined registers and, therefore, I move amendment 4. Any committee members wish to make any comments? No comments, wishing to be made. Members do not want to press. The question is that amendment 4 be agreed to or well agreed to. Amendment 4 is agreed to. I call amendments 5, 6 and 7, all in the name of John Swinney and all previously debated. I invite the Minister for Parliamentary Business to move amendments 5 to 7 on block. First of all, does any member object to a single question be put on amendments 5 to 7? No objection. The question is then amendments 5 to 6 be agreed to or well agreed to. Amendments 5 to 7 are agreed to. The question is that section 12 be agreed to or well agreed. I call amendments 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13, all in the name of John Swinney and all previously debated. I invite the Minister for Parliamentary Business to move amendments 8 to 13 on block. Does any member object to a single question being put on amendments 8 to 13? No objection. The question is that amendments 8 to 13 be agreed to or well agreed to. The question is that section 13 be agreed to or well agreed. The question is that section 14 be agreed to or well agreed. I now come to the group voting age for proxies at local government elections. I call amendment 14 in the name of John Swinney in a group of its own. The Minister for Parliamentary Business to move and to speak to amendment 14. Cymru, under those proposals, the normal rules with regard to absent voting will apply to 16 and 17-year-olds as they apply to those aged 18 or over. As the Deputy First Minister has previously made clear, most of the age-related arrangements in relation to normal electoral procedures, including absent voting, change automatically as a result of the lowering of the voting age in the bill. A few will be dealt with in the upcoming Scottish Parliament election order or the local government election order. However, in reviewing the bill ahead of stage 2, a reference in primary legislation to the local government proxy age being 18 was identified. Amendment 14 therefore makes an adjustment to that legislation to ensure that a person can vote as a proxy at local government elections in Scotland from the age of 16. The equivalent adjustment for Scottish Parliament elections will be made in the Scottish Parliament elections order. I therefore move amendment 14. Okay, any members wish to make any comments? Okay, minister, you wish to press a withdrawal. Press. Press, thank you. The question is that amendment 14 be agreed to or well agreed. Amendment 14 is agreed to. The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to or well agreed. Now to come to the group alterations in the register persons aged prior to 1 December 2015. I call amendment 15 the name of John Swinney in a group of its own Minister for parliamentary business to move and to speak to amendment 15. Thank you, convener. Today's final amendment is again the result of discussions with electoral administrators. Section 13 of the Representation of the People's Act 1983 requires publication of a revised version of electoral registers on 1 December each year or such later date as is prescribed. Aeros are also required to publish notice of alterations and additions to that register on the first day of every month, although not in the two months preceding the publication of the register, i.e. they don't need to publish in October and November 2015 this year. Aeros raised concerns with the Scottish Government that there was a potential for confusion about entitlement to vote arising if a young voter was included on a list of alterations to the register in the period between the bell coming into force and the publication of the new register on 1 December 2015. Although 16 and 17-year-olds will appear on the local government register as persons entitled to vote, they are not able to do so until 5 May 2016. Amendment 15 therefore inserts a new section into the bell providing that new young voter should appear in the register for the first time when the new annual register is published on 1 December. That will allow registration officers to set out clear boundaries between the monthly alterations to the previous year's register and the new register published on 1 December, which will mark the start of the new register year during which 16 and 17-year-olds will become eligible to vote. I therefore recommend that the committee supports the amendment and move amendment 15. Any members wish to make any comments? I agree to understand whether that means that the names of 16 and 17-year-olds will appear ordinarily in the register as of the bell coming into force or only as of 1 December. The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to or we all agreed. Amendment 15 is agreed to. The question is that section 16 and 19 be agreed to or we all agreed. The question is that the long title be agreed to or we all agreed. Thank you colleagues and thank you minister. That completes consideration of the bill. An amended version of the bill will be available tomorrow. Morning stage three amendments should be lodged by 4.30pm on Monday with the legislation team. I thank the minister for parliamentary business and his officials for attendance. We will have a two minute break until such time as we allow them to leave. We now come to agenda item 2. Agenda item 2 is the BBC memorandum of understanding UK Government's proposals. I want a short background explanation to where we are at on this particular item. Agenda item 2 involves consideration of a draft memorand of understanding MOU setting out a procedure for scrutiny arrangements in relation to the BBC in order that the Scottish Parliament can be consulted during the process of the BBC charter review that should be due to commence shortly. The MOU arises out with the recommendation of the Smith commission that the Scottish Parliament should be consulted on matters pertaining to the BBC that impact on Scotland. Notably the BBC charter review in the short term and also with regard to the BBC annual reports and accounts in the future. It is intended that the signatories to the MOU will be the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Government, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the BBC. I would like to emphasise that the draft MOU deals solely with the process of how the BBC engages and consults with the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government in the future. The MOU does not deal with in any respect the subject matter of any of the BBC programming or activities or the question of whether broadcasting should be part of any proposal for the further devolution of powers. This is not the focus of the discussion today. I will ask you to note that, on 8 June, the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs wrote to us setting out the Scottish Government's views on the draft MOU and suggesting a number of amendments to the MOU. I think that, actually, Stephen, that there is a slight anomaly, if I have got that correct, in the letter sent to us by the Cabinet Secretary. Do you think that you could just explain that while we are at this? Yes, I am happy to do that, convener. If members have the letter from Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs in front of them and compare the track changes that the Scottish Government Minister is suggesting, you will note that it is slightly different in terms of how it has been marked up under commitment paragraph 1 charter review. It is actually the third bullet point there, the one that reads, the department will consult the Scottish Government on the draft charter through the process of charter drafting. That is the significant change, it is not the one indicated above. The new bullet point that the Scottish Government suggests to be inserted into the draft MOU is the one that reads, the department will consult the Scottish Government on the draft charter through the process of charter drafting. Also, under paragraph 4 next charter, there are some suggested changes there from the Scottish Government. We should also note that the responses that have also been received from Education and Culture Committee and the Public Audit Committee on the draft MOU and those responses were already emailed to us. At this stage, Stuart, do you want to make any comments? We were also written to by the cabinet secretary basically the same letter as we have written to this committee. We examined the draft memorandum of understanding on Tuesday of this week and the letter from the Government and we took the view as outlined in the letter to the committee that our primary aim was to ensure that, as the committee has said, the spirit and the substance of Smith should be our underlying principle in whatever is agreed between the two Governments with regard to the memorandum of understanding. It was the view of the Education and Culture Committee that that should be what is achieved by the memorandum of understanding. We took no view on whether the original draft or the amendments achieved that, but we just taken note of the Government's view that they felt that it did not. Our view was that whatever is agreed must meet the Smith commission guarantees. We also had the response from the Public Audit Committee. Stephen then asked Tavish or Stuart McMillan where they want to see him. Just to give the committee a flavour of the second committee that looked at the MOU, the Public Audit Committee, on Wednesday of this week. Mr Scott and Mr McMillan, obviously members of that committee may additionally wish to comment, but the two points that I refer members to of substance in the Public Audit Committee's letter to you are first, the Public Audit Committee is suggesting that if and when the Secretary of State or the foreign secretary has the power to give directions to the BBC on annual reports and issues of finance, administration and work of the BBC, if and when they chose to exercise those directions, the Public Audit Committee is suggesting that consultation with the Scottish Parliament take place before any such directions are made. The second substantive point from the Public Audit Committee refers to the laying of annual reports and the question of what days those take place. The current draft of the MOU says next available sitting day. Usually annual reports from the BBC are produced in the month of July, which means that the Scottish Parliament would be likely to be in recess. The next available sitting day would therefore be much later in the year in September, and therefore there would be a difference between when the annual report is laid here and in Westminster. The Public Audit Committee is suggesting that we change that wording and we propose to DCMS to change that wording to the next day on which the office of the clerk is open, the office of the clerk being open through the summer recess. We would therefore be laying annual reports at the same time as Westminster to here. Those are the two suggested changes from the Public Audit Committee. On both of those and on Ms Hyslop's suggestions, we have not had any commentary back from the UK Department of Culture and Media in support as to whether or not they are happy with those amendments yet. Tell us what you say any more, are you? Are you happy with that? I think that Mr Stevens is giving a very fair illustration. I mean, it is what colleagues would understand that from an audit committee perspective, our interest was in the data that should be Scottish-specific, which would help Parliament to do a more effective job in assessing the performance of the BBC. That was our main point, but Stevens made a couple of technical suggestions about how to improve that, which he has just outlined. We are in a situation now where we have the Public Audit Committee's proposals put forward that have not been considered either by the DCMS or the Scottish Government, because of the timescale involved. That was obvious. The suggestions that were made by the Scottish Government through the cabinet secretary, DCMS, again, is pretty obvious, as Stevens has said, have not had yet the opportunity to consider that response. We are not quite at a situation yet where we can move to agreement on the MOU, because we are still pulling information from other sources. At this stage, we should delay consideration of the MOU until we obtain comments from the DCMS and the Scottish Government. The clerks will need to go and try to find out that. There may be discussions going between the DCMS and the Scottish Government about those issues just now, because obviously the Scottish Government will put forward its view on where the MOU needs to be adjusted. I hope that we can do that in the next couple of weeks before we get to recess, but it is really up to the discussions that take place between these other parties to come to a conclusion first. That being said, I thank members for their attendance at today's next meeting. We will be on 18 June, when the committee will be considering its work programme in relation to the Scotland Bill and the committee's subsequent meeting on 25 June. The committee expects to hear from both the Deputy First Minister and the Secretary of State for Scotland on the Scotland Bill. It is just a work programme discussion. It is just a work programme. It is not David Mundell. No, it is not David Mundell. They are both coming now in the 25th. I will now close this meeting. Thank you very much.