 My name is Dylan Fillion, and I invite you all to turn off your mobile phones if you haven't already done so. Can I welcome you to this meeting in 2017 of the Delicates Powers and law reform Committee? Unwet angen can also note the absence of Monica Lennon, who has said she apologises for not being able to be with us this morning. I'll move in to agenda item one, in the Earnest Committee's decision to an Ysbytyd o'r cymunedau sefydliadau fawr yn iawn,olyt yn fawr yn iawn, ond mae'r cymunedau yn ei ddif Fan yn ei ddif i fyfllwch o'r ddechrau'r regbeth, ond mae'r cymunedau yn iawn gefniodd beithas y Praerthau yn iawn. Y agenda y fawr yn iawn eich rhan aethau'r prysgwyr a'r prysgwyr yn iawn. Ffasgwyr y prysgwyr yn iawn eich yr ysbytyd y Draft Schools Consultation, Scotland Act 2010, Modification Regulations 2017. The instrument seeks to amend paragraphs 2 and 3 of schedule 1 of the Schools Consultation Act 2010. The amendments are to implement the policy objective that education authorities should not be required to comply with the consultation requirements in the 2010 act if they want to establish new nursery schools or new nursery classes in schools or to relocate existing nursery schools or nursery classes. At the point of laying this draft instrument for consideration by the Parliament and its publication by the National Archives, neither the instrument nor the 2010 act by virtue of which it is made include the definition of nursery school which is contained in section 131 of the Education Scotland Act 1980. That definition will only have effect once the instrument is approved by Parliament and made on behalf of the Scottish ministers by virtue of section 213 of the 2010 act, read with section 135.1 of the 1980 act. In the circumstances where an instrument is laid which inserts a new term or expression into an act and the term or expression is considered to properly obtain its definition as a consequence of provisions which are not explained in the instrument, the committee would expect a footnote to be added to the instrument to explain how the term or expression obtains its definition. It could assist the Parliament in the scrutiny of the instrument and readers of the instrument generally in understanding the provisions. In this short instrument, the definition of nursery school is integral to the provisions. Accordingly, does the committee agree to draw the regulations to the tension of Parliament on the general reporting ground as the definition of nursery school should, as I have said, be explained in the instrument? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the draft sale of tobacco registration of movable structures and fixed penalty notices, Scotland amendment regulations 2017 or the draft national bus travel concession scheme for older and disabled persons, Scotland amendment order 2017. Is the committee content with those instruments? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the sale of nicotine vapour products, prescribed documents, Scotland regulations 2017, SSI 2017-13. Is the committee content with those instruments? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the draft sale of nicotine vapour products, subject to any parliamentary procedure. No points have been raised by our legal advisers on land reform, Scotland act 2016, commencement number 5 and transition provisions regulations 2017, SSI 2017-20. Is the committee content with those instruments? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the draft sale of nicotine vapour products, subject to any parliamentary procedure. No points have been raised by our legal advisers on land reform, Scotland act 2017, SSI 2017-20. Is the committee content with those instruments? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on land reform, Scotland act 2017, SSI 2017-20. Is the committee content with those instruments? No points have been raised by our legal advisers. No points have been raised by our legal advisers. No points have been raised by our legal advisers. process and are periodically exercised by the Government in the spring, summer and autumn. Does the committee agree that it is content with the delegated powers confer on the Scottish ministers in the bill and the procedure to which that power is subject? Agenda item 6 is the Air Departure Tax Scotland Bill, which is a tax to be charged on the carriage of chargeable persons on chargeable aircraft by air from airports within Scotland. Eight sections of the bill confer delegated powers, two of which are standard, auxiliary and commencement powers. However, we may wish to ask questions on four of the powers as provided for in sections 7, 8, 10 and 34 of the bill. In section 7, there is a definition of standard-class travel for the purposes of the bill, including consideration of the size of the seat pitch for a passenger seat. Subsection 2 defines seat pitch with reference to the difference between the passenger's seat and the seat immediately in front of or behind it. If there is no seat immediately in front of or behind the relevant seat, the seat pitch is to be determined with regard to any guidance issued by Revenue Scotland. That raises a question, so does the committee agree to ask the Scottish Government why it considers it appropriate for provision regarding the definition of seat pitch to be made in guidance issued by Revenue Scotland as opposed to being contained in subordinate legislation? Does the committee also agree to ask the Scottish Government to indicate the type of provision that it is anticipated that Revenue Scotland might make in exercise of that power? Section 7, 3 provides that whether a class of travel is the only or the most basic class of travel available on a flight is to be determined with regard to any guidance issued by Revenue Scotland. Does the committee agree to ask the Scottish Government why it considers it appropriate for provision regarding the determination of the class of travel to be made in guidance issued by Revenue Scotland as opposed to being contained in subordinate legislation? Does the committee also agree to ask the Scottish Government to indicate the type of provision it is anticipated that Revenue Scotland might make in exercise of that power? Section 8, 1 confers power on the Scottish ministers to make provision concerning who is a chargeable passenger and who is a non-chargeable passenger, which aircraft are chargeable aircraft and which aircraft are non-chargeable aircraft. The terms chargeable passenger and chargeable aircraft are defined in sections 2 and 3 of the bill. The power accordingly enables ministers to amend the definitions contained in the act by regulations and to create definitions of non-chargeable passenger and non-chargeable aircraft. Subsection 2 provides that regulations made under section 8 might also add, change or remove any exemption from being a chargeable passenger or chargeable aircraft and might also add, change or remove any provision that defines or otherwise explains a term or definition in the bill. As the Government acknowledges in its delegated powers memorandum the concepts of chargeable passenger and chargeable aircraft are key to determining the basis on which liability for ADT will arise, does the committee therefore agree to ask the Government why it is considered appropriate in section 8, 1, to take up power to make provision concerning who is a non-chargeable passenger and which aircraft are non-chargeable aircraft and to create exemptions from being a chargeable passenger or chargeable aircraft, rather than making provision for such matters on the face of the bill. Section 10.2 enables Scottish ministers by regulation to make other provision concerning the structure of the tax, i.e. provision other than defining tax bans and setting the amount of tax for each tax rate as required by section 10.1, which raises the question, does the committee agree to ask the Scottish Government to explain how the power in section 10, 2, is intended to be used and why it is considered to be an appropriate delegation of power? The power proposed in section 34.1 would enable Scottish ministers to change any provision in the bill once enacted, which concerns the payment collection and management of ADT other than provision setting out the circumstances that give rise to the liability to tax itself. That is a wide power to modify the detailed provisions regarding payment collection and management that appears on the face of the bill. The delegated powers memorandum states that, once ADT is in operation, it may be necessary to make changes as to how the tax is administered, for example in light of Revenue Scotland's operational experience of collecting and managing the tax. Does the committee agree to ask the Scottish Government to provide further justification for the taking of such a wide power to alter the detailed machinery that has been set out on the face of the bill? Does the committee also agree to ask for examples of the sorts of changes that might be made in exercise of the power? Agenda item 7 is a consideration of the digital economy bill legislative consent memorandum, known as the LCM. The background is that this is a UK bill that was introduced in the House of Commons in July 2016. The bill contains a wide range of measures, including providing a broadband universal service for the UK, granting additional powers to OFCOM in respect of information, provision and powers to share data between public authorities, among other things. A few powers are conferred on the Scottish ministers in the bill. The committee has been afforded very little time—one meeting, this meeting—for the scrutiny of the powers in this bill, particularly for scrutiny of the broad and complex powers proposed to be conferred on the Scottish ministers in part 5. In order to meet agreed timescales, the committee is asked to agree its conclusions on the LCM today. It is also worth noting that the House of Lords delegated powers and regulatory reform committee published in its 13th report of session 2016-17 on the powers contained in parts 5 to 7 of the bill, which we may wish to bring to the attention of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, who are the lead committee for this LCM. Those recommendations relate to powers conferred on Scottish ministers. Part 5, Clause 32 and 6, Clause 38 to A and C, and Clause 38 to 3 of the bill, include powers conferred on Scottish ministers to make regulations to specify persons who may disclose information in relation to public service delivery and objectives for which information may be disclosed. Does the committee agree to draw to the attention of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee the conclusions made in the House of Lords report which were as follows? The authorities or descriptions of authorities who are to be specified persons should be listed on the face of the bill and ministers should not have power to add any public authority or description of authority, but only those authorities engaged in the provision of the types of public service specified in the bill. Also, only in those circumstances would we regard as appropriate a Henry VIII power allowing ministers to amend the list in the bill recommended above by affirmative procedure regulations. It also follows that ministers should not have power to specify very generalised objectives under Clause 36. Instead, they should be required to specify closely delineated objectives that can be properly scrutinised by Parliament. We are also deeply concerned about the power to prescribe as a specified person a person providing services to a public authority, Clause 33B. We recommend that Clause 33B should be removed from the bill unless the Government can explain to the satisfaction of the House why it is needed and what paragraphs are in place to prevent its misuse—paragraphs 24 to 27—of the report. On those three points, the committee agreed. Part 5, Clause 314, 382B and C and 383 of the bill includes powers conferred on Scottish ministers to make regulations to amend the list of permitted recipients of information from specified persons for use and connection with fuel poverty support schemes. Those clauses also amend the second condition that must be met for the disclosure of information to gas and electricity suppliers for fuel poverty purposes. Does the committee agree to draw to the attention of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee the conclusions made in the House of Lords report that are as follows? First, as regards the power to add new persons or descriptions of persons in subsection 1, the memorandum explains that it is needed so as to enable the list to be kept up to date with the persons that are required to deliver fuel poverty support or to administer, monitor and enforce the scheme. We recommend that the power that is drafted in very broad terms should be amended so as to reflect the narrow policy intention set out in the memorandum. Secondly, the power to amend subsection 3 is also an open-ended one. It is justified in the memorandum on the basis that it would enable the fuel poverty schemes to be updated should the statutory framework for the existing schemes change or new frameworks for support schemes be created. We consider that this power to should be amended in order to reflect that narrow policy intention paragraphs 32 and 33 of the report. Does the committee agree on those two points? Part 5, Clause 41, 4 and 48, 2, includes a power conferred on Scottish ministers to make regulations specifying persons who may disclose information in relation to debt owed to the public sector. Does the committee agree to draw to the attention of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee the conclusions again made in the House of Lords report, which are as follows. Firstly, the public authorities should be listed on the face of the bill, as we do not consider appropriate for ministers to have the power to decide by delicate legislation which authorities should be entitled to disclose or receive information under this potentially far-reaching and broadly drafted gateway. Secondly, ministers should not have power to add any public authority or description of authority, but only those authorities that they can show by reference to particular criteria specified in the bill have the date in recovering debt. Only in these circumstances would we regard as appropriate a Henry VIII power allowing ministers to amend the list in the bill, recommended above by affirmative procedure regulations. Thirdly, the power to prescribe a person who provides services to a public authority as a specified person should be removed from the bill unless the Government can provide a convincing explanation for its inclusion, which we note is entirely absent from the memorandum paragraph 59 of the report. Does the committee agree to those three points? Part 5 clauses 49.5 and 56.2 include a power conferred on Scottish ministers to make regulations specifying persons who may disclose information in relation to tackling fraud against the public sector. Does the committee agree to draw to the attention of the rural economy and connectivity committee the conclusions made in the House of Lords to the report? The public authorities, entitled to disclose or receive information under clause 49, should be listed on the face of the bill. Secondly, ministers should not have the power to add any public authority or description of authority but only authorities that they can show by reference to particular criteria that is specified in the bill are involved in taking action in connection with fraud against the public authority. Only in those circumstances would we regard as appropriate a Henry VIII power allowing ministers to amend the list in the bill, recommended above by affirmative procedure regulations. Thirdly, the power to prescribe a person who provides services to a public authority as a specified person should be removed from the bill unless the Government can provide a convincing explanation for its inclusion paragraph 77 of the report. Does the committee agree to those points? Thank you. With regard to three further delegated powers provisions, which are not powers to make subordinate legislation conferred on the Scottish Minister contained in an XB of the LCM, does the committee agree to draw those to the attention of the rural economy and connectivity committee as other delegated powers in the bill that affects Scotland? In addition, with regard to the very limited time that the committee has had to consider this LCM, does the committee agree to highlight in our report our concerns on this matter? Thank you. That concludes the public part of this meeting and I now move the meeting into private. Thank you.