 I welcome members to the ninth meeting in 2015 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. We have apologies from Margaret McCulloch. As always I ask members to switch off mobile phones, please. Agender item one is instrument subject to affirmative procedure. No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the local government finance Scotland amendment order 2015 draft, nor on the public bodies joint working Scotland Act 2015 consequential modifications and savings order 2015 draft. However, the committee may wish to note that both instruments were withdrawn and relayed to correct errors identified by our legal advisers. Is the committee content with those instruments, please? Agender item two is instrument subject to negative procedure. No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the support and assistance of young people leaving care, Scotland amendment regulations 2015, assisted side 2015-62, nor on the provision of water and sewerage services reasonable cost Scotland regulations 2015, SSI 2015-79, nor the bankruptcy, miscellaneous amendments Scotland regulations 2015, SSI 2015-80, nor the personal injuries NHS charges amount Scotland amendment regulations 2015, SSI 2015-81, nor the national health service optical charges and payments Scotland amendment regulations 2015, SSI 2015-86, nor the public bodies joint working integration and joint board establishment Scotland order 2015, SSI 2015-88, nor the Scottish roadworks register prescribed fees regulations 2015, SSI 2015-89, the national health service cross-border healthcare Scotland amendment regulations 2015, SSI 2015-91, the reservoirs panels of reservoir engineers sections under which members may be appointed, Scotland order 2015, SSI 2015-92, nor the ways to recycle quality Scotland regulations 2015, SSI 2015-101, nor the professional standards authority for health and social care fees regulations 2015, SSI 2015-400. However, the committee may wish to note that SSI 2015-80 makes amendments to the bankruptcy Scotland regulations 2014, SSI 2014-25, the bankruptcy applications and decision Scotland regulations 2014, SSI 2014-226 and the bankruptcy fees Scotland regulations 2014, SSI 2014-227 in view of the committee's reports on those instruments. The committee may also wish to draw a matter in relation to SSI 2015-91 to the attention of the league committee for the instrument. The requirements which the regulations transpose for Scotland should have been transposed by 25 October 2013, which was the date of the coming into force of the 2013 regulations. No explanation for the delay is provided in the policy note. Are we agreed to draw these matters to the attention of the league committee? Thank you. Is the committee otherwise content with those instruments? Thank you. Gender item 3 is instruments not subject to any parliamentary procedure. The Reservoirs Scotland Act 2011, commencement number 3 and transitional provisions, order 2015, SSI 2015-63. The meaning of this instrument could be clearer in the way that section 106 of the Reservoirs Scotland Act 2011 is commenced with effect from 1 April 2015. The Scottish Government does not intend, with the effect from that date, to commence in relation to Crown land the powers of entry for a purpose specified in paragraph B2K of section 91-2. Nor to commence the power of entry mentioned in section 93-1. The Government does intend to commence with effect from that date in relation to Crown land the powers of entry for a purpose specified in section 91-1 and 2A and L in section of 93-2 so far as it applies where entry is taken for any such purpose. We'll just run that again. The Government does intend to commence with effect from that date in relation to Crown land the powers of entry for a purpose specified in section 91-1 and 2A and L in section 93-2 so far as it applies where entry is taken for any such purpose. Thank you for your patience. The schedule to the order could have been more clearly expressed, sorry, could have more clearly expressed those intentions by making provision in column 3 that section 110-6, the 202,011 act, is commenced for those restricted purposes specified in section 91-1 and 2A and L and section 93-2 so far as it applies where entry is taken for any such purpose. This would be clearer given that section 110-6 expressly refers to all the powers conferred by section 91, whether those specified in that section or the ancillary powers referred to in section 93-1 and 2, but not all those powers are commenced by this order. Does the committee therefore agree to draw the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground H as the meaning could be clearer? I have a suspicion my inability to read out the explanation rather makes the point. Thank you. Turning now to the Pollution Prevention Control Act 1999, commencement number 3, Scotland Order 2015, SSI 2015-74. Subparagraph G123 of article 22 commences the repeal of certain sections of the Environment Act 1995. Subparagraphs H2L of article 22 also commences the repeal of certain sections but do not make clear to which act or act the specified sections belong. It is intended that subparagraphs H2L should commence the repeal of further sections of the Environment Act 1995, running on from subparagraph G123. Subparagraphs H2L are therefore incorrectly numbered and should be numbered G4-8. Does the committee therefore agree to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground H as its meaning could be clearer? John. I think that this is quite fundamental. I accept that sometimes we are dealing with fairly minor errors in this committee but if something is G4-8 it is quite different from being H2L. It is just absolutely clear factual. I am to like figures and figures are involved in this. It either is one or the other and it is basically wrong. While I understand how it happened I do think that we should make a point about it. Does the committee also agree to call on the Scottish Government to correct this error by laying a further instrument? John. In this regard and I think that probably the most elegant way of dealing with this situation is just to lay a new instrument. I agree with the Government to consider that. No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the courts reform Scotland Act 2014, commencement number 2, transitional and saving provisions order 2015, SSI 2015, 77, nor on the post 16 education Scotland Act 2013, commencement number 6, order 2015, SSI 2015, 82, nor on the act of a journal criminal procedure rules amendment reporting restrictions 2015, SSI 2015, 84, nor on the act of sederant rules of the court of session and sheriff court rules amendment number 3, reporting restrictions 2015, SSI 2015, 85. Is the committee content with these instruments, please? Yes. Gender item 4, the Air Weapons and Licensing Scotland Bill. This item of business consideration of the Scottish Government's response to the committee's stage 1 report on this bill. Members have seen the briefing paper and the response of the Government. The committee may wish to highlight the following matters to the lead committee of the bill. Section 371 enables Scottish ministers to make further provision by regulation for the purposes of part 1 of the bill. However, the committee's report noted that the powers of sections 4, 1, 6, 1, 7, 2, 13, 9, 14, 2, 15, 1, 17, 6 and 18, 2 and 4 set out various matters of part 1 of the bill, which may be prescribed by regulation. The committee did not consider the broad general power of section 371 to be necessary and recommended that it be removed by amendment stage 2. The report further recommended that the Government considers that further types of provision need to be specified beyond those already set out in sections 4, 1 to 37, 2. This could be achieved by bringing forward appropriate amendments. The committee's report also commented on section 76 of the bill, which confers powers to make ancillary provisions in stand-alone regulations. Scottish ministers may make incidental supplementary consequential, transitional, transitory or saving provision as the ministers consider necessary or expedient for the purposes of or inconsequence of, or for giving full effect to any provision of the act or any provision made under it. The committee considered the use of the words or any provision made under it to be unusual and that the Government has not provided sufficient justification for this use of additional wording. The committee considered that the scope of the power in section 76 is uncertain in scope and recommended that it be removed by amendment at stage 2. The Government's response to the report indicates that it does not intend to accept the committee's recommendations in relation to the two matters that I have just discussed. Do members have any comments, please? Or are we comfortable simply to draw this to the Governments? Well, I am content to draw this to the Governments. Sorry, I think that it is to the committee to be fair. Yes, but this is a Government response. At the risk of putting my head in a noose, I think that the Government's response is quite a reasonable one and that there will be perhaps a need for broader powers on occasion in terms of a developing situation around air gun licensing. Anyway, that is all I have to say. Okay, thank you. I think that this is broadly an issue of policy and it would be entirely proper to draw this attention to the appropriate policy committee for them to consider whether there is a policy need for this. I do feel slightly uncomfortable with it in its present form, but it may well be that when the policy committee looks at it, they conclude otherwise. I think that the general argument is that we are looking at some slightly unusual words and there is no obvious explanation as to why they should be there, but plainly that is a matter of policy and therefore I suggest referring it to the committee as the appropriate thing to do. Colleagues are comfortable with that. That is what we will do then, please. Does the committee have any further comments? Or shall we just look at what comes back at stage 2, assuming that there are only amendments that come to us? A matter for the policy committee. Okay. Thank you. Here, if it's how much of its policy and how much of it is, because the wording does seem to be quite important and we haven't really had an explanation, so I think that the point that we might reconsider after stage 2 is fine. Okay, thank you, colleagues. I think that draws us to the end of the agenda. Thank you very much. In which case I close this meeting.