Back to the Scottish Parliament Business Bulletin No.31/2005: Thursday 24 February 2005
Archive Home

Business Bulletin 1999-2011

Minutes of Proceedings 1999-2011

Journal of Parliamentary Proceedings Sessions 1 & 2

Committees Sessions 1, 2 & 3

Annual reports

An
I


Section G – Bills

New Bills introduced or reprinted on 23 February 2005

Fire (Scotland) Bill—The Bill was reprinted as passed (SP Bill 24B) (Executive Bill).

New amendments to Bills lodged on 23 February 2005

Gaelic Language (Scotland) Bill – Stage Two

Section 1

Dr Elaine Murray

1 In section 1, page 1, line 13, at end insert <and

( ) Gaelic education and Gaelic culture,>

Peter Peacock

2 In section 1, page 1, line 19, after <Scotland> insert <commanding equal respect to the English language>

Schedule 1

Peter Peacock

3 In schedule 1, page 9, line 11, after <executive> insert <("Ceannard")>

Section 2

Peter Peacock

4 In section 2, page 2, line 5, after <section> insert—

<( ) no later than 5 years after the date on which a plan is published under subsection (6), and

( ) whenever required to do so by the Scottish Ministers under subsection (7),>

Peter Peacock

5 In section 2, page 2, line 8, at end insert—

<( ) consult the Parliament,>

Peter Peacock

6 In section 2, page 2, line 26, at end insert <, and

( ) lay a copy of it before the Parliament.>

Peter Peacock

7 In section 2, page 2, line 29, leave out subsection (8)

Section 3

Peter Peacock

8 In section 3, page 3, line 6, after at end, insert <and

( ) in the Bòrd’s opinion, there is potential for the authority to develop the use of the Gaelic language in connection with the exercise of those functions,>

Peter Peacock

9 In section 3, page 3, line 19, at end insert—

<( ) the potential for developing the use of the Gaelic language in connection with the exercise of those functions,>

Section 8

Peter Peacock

10 In section 8, page 6, line 21, at end insert—

<(6A) The Bòrd may vary or revoke guidance published under subsection (6), and subsections (2) to (6) apply to a variation.

(6B) Before revoking guidance published under subsection (6), the Bòrd must obtain the consent of the Scottish Ministers.>

Peter Peacock

11 In section 8, page 6, line 24, at end insert—

<( ) In preparing guidance under subsection (1) and giving advice and assistance under subsection (7), the Bòrd must seek to give effect, so far as is both appropriate in the circumstances and reasonably practicable, to the principle that the Gaelic and English languages should be accorded equal respect.>

Section 9

Peter Peacock

12 In section 9, page 6, line 27, leave out <issue> and insert <prepare and submit to the Scottish Ministers>

Peter Peacock

13 In section 9, page 6, line 29, leave out subsections (2) to (4) and insert—

<( ) Subsections (2) to (6B) of section 8 apply to guidance under subsection (1) as they apply to guidance under subsection (1) of that section.>

Members’ Bills Proposals

A Member who has lodged a proposal has the right to introduce a Member’s Bill to give effect to that proposal under Rule 9.14.12 of the Standing Orders provided:

  • the proposal has attracted 18 supporters which include members of at least half of the political parties or groups represented on the Parliamentary Bureau; and

  • the Scottish Executive has not given an indication under Rule 9.14.13 that it or Her Majesty’s Government will initiate legislation to give effect to the proposal.

The Bills page of the Parliamentary website shows the current status in this regard.

Names marked with an (*) are new names of support.

Mark Ruskell: Proposed Liability for Release of Genetically Modified Organisms (Scotland) Bill—Proposal for a Bill to amend the law of damages in relation to the release of genetically modified organisms by making the holder of the consent to release strictly liable for economic damages that result from GM contamination (lodged 25 January 2005)

A copy of the statement of reasons on why further consultation is not required lodged on 13 December 2004 is available in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe).

The Environment and Rural Development Committee indicated on 19 January 2005 that it was satisfied with those reasons.

A copy of the consultation paper together with copies of each response and a summary of all responses (including the conclusions drawn from those responses) are available in SPICe.

Supported by: Linda Fabiani*

An
I