 Good morning everyone, and can I welcome members to the 16th meeting in 2017 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. Agenda item 1 is a decision on taking business in private and it is proposed that the committee take item 7 in private. Item 7 is the consideration of the committee's work programme, so are you content that we take item 7 in private? Agenda item 2, which is an instrument subject to the affirmative procedure and no points have been raised by our legal advisers on the draft in Solace regulation EU 2015-848 miscellaneous amendments Scotland regulations 2017 or the draft Human Trafficking and Exploitation Scotland Act 2015 relevant trafficking or exploitation offences and relevant UK orders regulations 2017 or the draft Criminal Justice Scotland Act 2016 consequential and transitional provisions regulations 2017. Agenda item 3 is an instrument subject to negative procedure and the next instrument for consideration is the M90A90 trunk road admiralty interchange to the many variable speed limits actively managed hard shoulder and bus lane regulations 2017 SSI 2017 number 129. The regulations provide for variable speed limits a bus lane and an actively managed hard shoulder on various sections of the M90A90 Edinburgh to Freyserborough trunk road from admiralty interchange to the many. Regulation 6 applies the motorway traffic Scotland regulations 1995 to the relevant road as if they have been modified to provide for an actively managed hard shoulder. The relevant road is the M90A90 Edinburgh Freyserborough trunk road from admiralty interchange to the many. That will permit the use of an actively managed hard shoulder on the new Queensbury crossing by specified buses in certain circumstances. Regulation 6 among other things modifies the 1995 regulations in their application to the relevant road to make provision for how restrictions on stopping and other traffic restrictions apply to an emergency refuge area. The definition of that expression in Regulation 6Ai appears to be defectively drafted. It is defined as a part of the relevant special road, which meets certain criteria set out in heads A and B. The relevant special road is not identified by this instrument, the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, by virtue of which it is made, or the Motorways Traffic Scotland Regulations 1995. Accordingly, do members therefore agree to draw the regulations to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground A i as they appear to be defectively drafted for the reason I have just outlined. The Scottish Government has indicated to the committee that it will keep the possibility of an amendment to correct the drafting area under review when considering further future regulations in this area. I take some comfort from the fact that the Scottish Government recognises the drafting error. However, on this occasion, I do not think that it is comforting enough that it will be looked at at some time in the future that is not defined, as we know from this committee that these commitments can sometimes drift on. I prefer to see a commitment for this to be dealt with with some urgency. I think that you make a good point. I understand that this could affect the outcome of road traffic offences or not. Since it is a new construction project, the legislation should also be new as well and absolutely fit for purpose before it starts. Alison, do you want to see it? I absolutely concur with Monica Lennon. I think that in this instance it really should be dealt with as a matter of urgency. I think that if we leave this unattended, it will have an effect possibly on people's lives and I do not think that that is acceptable to the road traffic instances. I suggest that Regulation 6 of the instrument makes provision for the actively managed hard shoulder on the new Queensford crossing, which is a development of major significance. Does the committee therefore agree that the error should be corrected by amendment as soon as possible and that we would invite the Government to do so? Thanks. The next instrument for consideration is the town and country planning fees for applications and deemed applications Scotland amendment 2, Regulations 2017, SSI 2017 number 149. Those regulations were originally laid before Parliament on 21 April 2017. Members will recall that its meeting on 9 May 2017, the committee agreed to draw the regulations to the attention of Parliament as they appeared to be defectively drafted. The regulations before us today were laid before the Parliament on 10 May 2017 and correct those defective drafting emails. They come into force on 31 May 2017, apart from Regulation 2, which comes into force on 1 June 2017. As a consequence of the Scottish Government correcting the drafting errors identified by the committee, the regulations do not respect the requirements that at least 28 days should elaps between the laying of an instrument that is subject to the negative procedure and the coming into force of that instrument. Accordingly, does the committee agree to draw the regulations to the attention of Parliament under reporting grounds G as the instrument fails to comply with the requirements of section 28.2 of the interpretation and legislative reform Scotland Act 2010? However, does the committee agree to find the failure to comply with section 28 to be acceptable in the circumstances as the regulations correctivously defects which the committee has identified in the town and country planning fees for applications and deemed applications Scotland amendment regulations 2017? Furthermore, in accordance with the committee's objective of reducing the number of outstanding instruments that need to be amended wherever possible, does the committee agree to welcome the Scottish Government's intention to bring forward this amended instrument as soon as possible? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the academic awards and distinctions university of the Highlands and Islands Scotland Order of Council 2017, SSI 2017 number 146. Is the committee content with this instrument? Thank you. Moving now to agenda item 4, which is instruments not subject to any parliamentary procedure and no points have been raised by our legal advisers on the human trafficking and exportation Scotland Act 2015 commencement number 3 and transitional provisions, regulations 2017, SSI 2017 number 140. So, is the committee content with this instrument? Many thanks. We now move to agenda item 5, which is the Air Deporture Tax Scotland Bill. On agenda item 5 is the consideration of the Scottish Government's response to the committee's recommendation at stage 1 of the Air Deporture Tax Scotland Bill. Members will recall that the committee recommended that amendments to the bill be brought forward by the Scottish Government at stage 2 in two areas. Firstly, the committee recommended that the Scottish Government bring forward amendments that make detailed provision for exemptions from the definition of chargeable passenger and chargeable aircraft, which would afford Parliament the best opportunity for full and effective scrutiny of this significant aspect of the bill's policy. Secondly, the committee recommended that the Scottish Government consider bringing forward an appropriate amendment at stage 2 to more closely align the power in section 10.2, with its stated policy intention of enabling the Scottish ministers to make provision relating to the core structure of ADT as provided for in section 9 of the bill, which does not relate to tax bans or tax rate amounts. The Scottish Government has responded to the Finance and Constitution Committee and, in so doing, has responded to the recommendations of this committee. In its response, the Scottish Government has advised that it will bring forward amendments to the bill at stage 2, providing for passengers and aircraft exemptions. The response further notes that the Scottish Government is exploring issues concerning the introduction of an ear departure tax exemption for passengers flying from Highlands and Islands airports. However, the Scottish Government has advised that section 10.2 of the bill is currently drafted and, when read in context with section 10.1 and 10.3, it is consistent with the policy intention of bringing a secondary legislation power to make provision relating to the structure of the tax beyond defining tax bans and setting tax rate amounts. As such, the Scottish Government does not plan to bring forward an amendment at stage 2 with regard to the provision. Accordingly, does the committee agree to welcome the Scottish Government's intention to bring forward amendments that make detailed provision for exemptions from the definition of chargeable passenger and chargeable aircraft? Does the committee agree to note, however, that the Scottish Government's position on section 10.2? We move now to agenda item 6, which is the Railway Policing Scotland Bill. Item 6 is the consideration of the Scottish Government's response to the committee's recommendations at stage 1 of the Railway Policing Scotland Bill. The committee recommended that the power in new section 85c1 of the Police and Fire Reform Scotland Act 2012 inserted by section 1 of the bill be amended at stage 2 so that it is subject to the affirmative procedure. The Scottish Government has responded to the stage 1 report of the Justice Committee as the lead committee on the bill and, in so doing, has agreed to the committee's recommendation. Accordingly, does the committee agree to welcome the Scottish Government's intention to bring forward an amendment at stage 2 to make the power in the new section 85c1 of the Police and Fire Reform Scotland Act 2012 inserted by section 1 of the bill, subject to the affirmative procedure? I move the meeting into private.