Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Functions Exercisable in or as Regards Scotland) Order 2015
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
† Bain, Mr William (Glasgow North East) (Lab)
† Banks, Gordon (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Lab)
† Barclay, Stephen (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)
† Binley, Mr Brian (Northampton South) (Con)
† Bruce, Fiona (Congleton) (Con)
† Cairns, Alun (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales)
† Clarke, Mr Tom (Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill) (Lab)
† Donohoe, Mr Brian H. (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)
† Doran, Mr Frank (Aberdeen North) (Lab)
† Hamilton, Mr David (Midlothian) (Lab)
† Hemming, John (Birmingham, Yardley) (LD)
† Kelly, Chris (Dudley South) (Con)
† Latham, Pauline (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)
Lazarowicz, Mark (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op)
† Mundell, David (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland)
† Watkinson, Dame Angela (Hornchurch and Upminster) (Con)
Whiteford, Dr Eilidh (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)
† Willott, Jenny (Cardiff Central) (LD)
Marek Kubala, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
Fifth Delegated Legislation Committee
Wednesday 17 December 2014
[Sir Edward Leigh in the Chair]
Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Functions Exercisable in or as Regards Scotland) Order 2015
2.30 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Scotland Act 1998 (Functions Exercisable in or as Regards Scotland) Order 2015.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward, for, I think, the first time.
The order was laid before the House on 15 October 2014. The legal need for it is fairly technical and complicated, but the problem that it addresses is straightforward. Agriculture is devolved to Scottish Ministers, so without the order and its companion instrument, their competence to administer support claims would end at Scotland’s borders. Without the order, Scottish farmers who hold land in any or all of the other UK Administrations in addition to land held in Scotland would be in an untenable position. Scottish Ministers would not be able to administer the non-Scottish part of the farmers’ holdings, but neither would the other Administrations, as they would view the beneficiaries as being Scottish. The order resolves that position by extending Scottish Ministers’ competence.
To clarify the technical position, I shall set out the situation regarding the common agricultural policy that the order is intended to address. Under European legislation governing the CAP, a “farmer” is defined by reference to a “holding” across the UK. However, farm businesses often do not fall neatly within Administration boundaries, so there are several businesses with land in more than one UK Administration. The European regulatory reference to a “farmer” is therefore not sufficient to identify those Scottish farmers over whom Scottish Ministers should have administrative competence. The order will define a “Scottish farmer” as one having land wholly or partly in Scotland. Collectively, businesses with land in more than one Administration are known as cross-border farmers.
The system of agricultural support under the CAP was last reformed in 2003-04 to provide income support for farmers. Those arrangements are set out in Council regulations (EC) Nos. 637/2008 and 73/2009. As part of those arrangements, the administrative responsibility for cross-border farmers needed to be resolved. Two Scotland Act orders—the Scotland Act 1998 (Functions Exercisable in or as Regards Scotland) Order 2004, which is a section 30 order, and the Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Functions) Order 2004, which is a section 106 order—which I shall refer to as the 2004 orders, facilitated the transfer of powers to Scottish Ministers, so that they could administer support claims for Scottish farmers. Those orders tied in with a UK
instrument, the Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment and Support Schemes (Integrated Administration and Control System) Regulations 2009, which I shall refer to as the IACS regulations, as the EU requires claims for support to be administered by a single competent authority.The current CAP arrangements will end on 31 December 2014. The latest reforms for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the CAP are set out in Council regulation (EC) No. 1307/2013, which involves repealing Council regulations (EC) Nos. 637/ 2008 and 73/2009 with effect from 1 January 2015. Two new orders in similar terms to the existing 2004 orders are required, so that Scottish Ministers can continue to administer claims as the competent authority under the IACS regulations in respect of cross-border farmers.
The draft order, which is to be made under section 30(3) of the Scotland Act 1998, was laid before the House on the same day as its companion instrument, the Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Functions) Order 2014, which is to be made under section 106 of the 1998 Act. The section 106 order is subject to annulment, so it is not being considered with this section 30(3) order, but to understand fully what the section 30(3) order achieves, it is important that hon. Members are aware of the section 106 order and how the two orders work together.
This draft order will ensure that certain functions should be treated as functions that are exercisable in or as regards Scotland, thus making it clear that the Scottish Parliament has competence to deal with cross-border farmers. The section 106 order will provide that those functions in relation to cross-border farmers may be exercised separately by Scottish Ministers. Ultimately, the two orders will combine, in a similar way to the 2004 orders, to allow the CAP scheme management arrangements to continue when the new arrangements take effect from 1 January 2015. Scottish Ministers will thus be able to continue to administer claims as the competent authority under the IACS regulations in respect of cross-border farmers.
The draft order demonstrates the Government’s continued commitment to working with the Scottish Government to make the devolution settlement work. It is a necessary solution to ensure that the Scottish Parliament has competence to deal with cross-border farmers. The Scottish Parliament’s Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee considered the order on 26 November, and I commend it to the Committee.
2.35 pm
Gordon Banks (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Lab): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward.
I thank the Minister for his detailed outline of the order’s purpose. As we heard, the measure is quite technical, so I will aim to keep my comments even briefer than the Minister’s. This is the fourth such Committee on which he has served over the past few weeks, so I am sure he will be thankful for that brevity. He can call it an early Christmas present—and perhaps the only one that he will get from me.
As the Minister indicated, the order will be made under section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998. It arises due to next year’s implementation of significant changes to the common agricultural policy. Although I recognise that the relative merits or demerits of those changes are
not in the Committee’s remit, as someone who represents a rural constituency, I acknowledge the impact of the CAP on those who depend on agriculture to make a living and the need to legislate with great care in this area. Bearing that point in mind, I recognise that the order has the important function of ensuring that Scottish Ministers continue to have competence to deal with Scottish farmers by defining the term “Scottish farmer” and renewing cross-border arrangements in the light of those changes at the European level. I recognise the need for, and approve of, the legislative measures to achieve continuity in this area.I have little more to add about the order, but I will be grateful if the Minister clarifies a few small points. Will he confirm whether the definition of “Scottish farmer” in the order differs from that under its preceding 1999 and 2004 orders? Will he confirm that the order will not make the system any more onerous for a farmer with a cross-border holding and that the process for determining which authority deals with such a holding has not changed?
The fact that this is the fourth statutory instrument relating to Scotland that has been considered in the Committee in the past month only reinforces the fact that devolution is not a static process, but something that requires continual adjustment and renewal if it is to function successfully. I am pleased that both Parliaments are able to work together constructively when legislating in this area, which only highlights the strengths of devolution. The order has our support.
2.38 pm
David Mundell: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments, and I absolutely agreed with his final point. Scotland continues to be served by two Parliaments, both of which play an important role in forming the country’s legislative framework and creating a better Scotland for the people who live there. Agriculture is important in Scotland—in his constituency as well as in mine—and it is appropriate that Members of Parliament in Westminster continue to contribute to the debate about that.
I confirm that the definition of “Scottish farmer” is unchanged. Regarding the farmers themselves, there is a change, in that the EU regulations as now set out allow them to choose which Administration will be the lead Administration in dealing with claims.
Mr Brian Binley (Northampton South) (Con): I would be most grateful if the Minister clarified the following point. He is right to say that farmers can apply to have such matters dealt with if they have holdings in both England and Scotland. Is someone going to check that they are not applying to both authorities? Can the Minister assure me that such checks will be made and that the authorities will talk to each other to ensure that that does not happen?
David Mundell: I can assure my hon. Friend that, despite the suggestions to the contrary that we sometimes see in the media, there are in fact very close working relations between the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Scottish Government, and I work closely with the Cabinet Secretary with responsibility for agriculture in Scotland. I am sure that the Scottish Government authorities—who of course follow our proceedings very closely—will have heard what my hon. Friend had to say, as will my DEFRA colleagues. However, I can assure him that checks are made to ensure that there is no double claiming.
Mr Tom Clarke (Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill) (Lab): The Minister might be a little surprised to know that there are farmers in my constituency, and I am sure they are fully aware of this afternoon’s important discussion. He helpfully explained the link between the Scotland Office and DEFRA. Have the farmers been formally consulted, and if so, what was their reaction?
David Mundell: I can say with some certainty that farmers will want to continue to receive their support payments when the regulations are changed on 1 January. The change in the regulations was well advertised within the agricultural community, and the order will ensure a seamless transition between the old arrangements and the new ones. It is therefore clear that the farming community is well aware of the new arrangements and wants us to ensure that there is no disruption to their support payments, and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman and other Opposition members of the Committee would not want to such disruption to occur.