Seòmar agus comataidhean

Also under this agenda item, no points have been raised on the following instrument.

Is the committee content with the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

You have covered a great range of things that I was thinking of asking about. I would like to look at the committee’s principle that there should be a statutory requirement that any instrument that is made using the affirmative procedure must contain a sunset provision. Will you outline your approach in setting such review requirements? How does the Scottish Government decide what the sunset provision should be—how far it may go?

When you introduce legislation for consideration by the Parliament, is a sunset provision—if we are allowed to call it that—considered at that time, as opposed to waiting to see how things are going to develop?

I have listened to what has been said and I can sort of understand an element of it. At the same time, I am very worried about throwing babies out with the bath water. There is a lot of stuff in the instrument that is necessary and I will vote in favour of keeping it.

I know from what you have said and from what I have heard you say before, Deputy First Minister, that you recognise and appreciate the procedural imperatives that the committee brings forward for the benefit of the Parliament and for good governance.

On the back of what you have been saying, and in acknowledgment of the range of legal necessities that the Scottish Government has to recognise, do you think that it is the immunisation, scientific and health imperatives that come first and foremost for the Scottish Government and that lead to the extensions that we have been talking about? Is the reason for the six-month extension the potential necessity—which we hope there will not be—of having to come back to all this during those six months to deal with another eruption of Covid?

The clerks will put the result on the BlueJeans chat function, because that is the correct procedure, and I will then read it out.

Meanwhile, I can say that no points have been raised on SSIs 2021/465 and 2021/477. Is the committee content with those instruments? Members are content. That is fine, thank you.

The result of the division on SSIs 2021/475, 2021/496, 2021/497 and 2021/498 is: For 2, Against 3, Abstentions 0.

Therefore, we are not agreed.

I thank members for that, and I thank the clerking team for putting up with my procedure.

No points have been raised on the instruments. Is the committee content with the instruments?

No member has indicated that they are not content or that they wish to speak, so we are agreed.

Also under agenda item 7—I jumped ahead too quickly—no points have been raised on the following four instruments.

Thank you very much, Deputy First Minister, and thanks very much to Craig Hoy. My computer fell out for a bit, so I missed some of the excitement of the past 20 minutes. We can move on now to Paul Sweeney.