Mr Miller
Copy to:
Mrl)~
Mr
l:;;;s, CG
Mr Sinclair, CG, Sols
INTERNATIONAL
CRIMINAL
COURT
1.
I refer to your mmute of 14 December.
2.
I have very little to add to the comments made by Mr Rogers.
3.
It seems likely that everything that is required of us by the Statute will fall within
devolved competence.
However, I have not looked at the Statute in detail and I suppose it is
just possible that there night be something there that impi1;Igeson a reserved area. You might
therefore want to substitute the first sentence of paragraph 7 of the draft submission, with
).
something along the following lines:-
''In the circumstances, we suggest that the Secretary of State may wish to remind the
Foreign Secretary of the fact that the subject matter of the nec'essary legislation would
appear to fall entirely within the competence of the Scottish Parliament, insofar as it
relates to Scotland;"
4.
It might be worthwhile
emphasising
the fact that, assuming
that the Scottish
Executive were agreeable to legislation to enable the Statute to be ratified, the question of
whether or not the obligations relating to Scotland are included in a Westminster Bill or an
ASP should not in practice hold up the ratification of the Statute.
Wherever the provisions
eventually appear, the same work will require to be carried out to ~mable the necessary
legislation to be drafted.
Alison CouD
Solicitor's Office
Division 2
G-B 10
Victoria Quay
a:' 40567
Fax: 0591
,;.1I;f;(i'~e\,,''''''<·'·«ei't·9'SJ8'1
~~~ti.t~j.{S1m1=-,~,.~~~,~;.~::-~.;~:._
.:<
"~
Mr C Miller, lID
~~-
Copy to:
Miss Coull, Sols
~,~.
Mr Burgess, c;G
Mr Sinclair, CG-Sols
u~
INTERNATIONAL
CRIMINAL COURT
\(L1.
1.
Thank you for your minute of 14 December.
2.
While I agree with the substance of the analysis in your draft submission, I think that
it needs to make the point a bit more strongly. I suggest that both the submission and the
draft letter should refer to the fact that the Government has announced to Parliament that it
expects a convention to be established under which Wes~ster
will not normally legislate
about.devolved matters in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament. In the
)
penultimate sentence of the draft letter, for example, I suggest that the final two sentences
might be replaced with something like the following:
"However, we have announced to Parliament that we expect a convention to be
established whereby Westminster will not normally legislate about devolved matters
in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.
The decision about
whether there should be separate Scottish legislation or whether to agree to a UK-wide
Bill at Westminster must therefore await the establishment of the Parliament and the
appointment of the Scottish Ministers."
3.
While what you say in the present second sentence of that paragraph may well be the
case, I do not think that it is necessary to make that particular point, and it might risk making
the Secretary of Stat, un-cooperative.
~
4.
I should note that there has been quite a bit of thinking recently hereabout how and
when the consent of the Scottish Parliament should be sought for UK-wide legislation. The
thinking is summarised in Mr Walford's minute ofStItNovember,
which I am copying
~
separately to you and Miss Coull.
~
5.
One other minor point: in paragraph 5 of the submission and the second paragraph of
the 4raft letter, it would be more accurate to say that the observation and implementation of
international obligations is devolved.so far as the obligations relate to devolved matters.
DAVID ROGERS
Constitution Group
G-H93
Victoria Quay
Ext 45534
15 December 1998
SAS12701.128
From: David Rogers
Constitution Group - Functions
7 December, 1998
'~
'-,
.<::- ( \
Mr Beaton, SCA
Copy to:
Mr Walford, CG
Mr Ewing, CG'
Mrs Brannan, HD
Mr Ferguson, Liaison Division
Mr Mason, EID
Mr Jamieson, CG
Ms Hibbert, CG
PRIVATE
MEMBERS'
BILLS: VIENNA SALES CONVENTION
I
1.
I refer to your submission of 2 December seeking clearance for a handout Bill to be
introduced at Westminster which will partially cover devolved matters in Scotland.
2.
The Government
announced
in the summer that it expects
a convention
to be
established whereby Westminster will not normally legislate about devolved matters without
the consent of the Scottish Parliament.
There has been quite a bit of thinking recently about
the circumstances
this should happen, how the Scottish Parliament's
consent should be
obtained, and in particular the arrangements which need to be made for those Bills which may
be going through Parliament at the time when the Scottish Parliament assumes is powers. We
are drafting guidance on the point.
Rather than going on at length about the conclusions
which have been reached, I am sending you the relevant correspondence with the hard copy
of this minute.
Mr Walford's
minute of 19 November
summarises the CG and Liaison
Division thinking,
3.
You will see ftom the annex to Mr Ferguson's minute of 11 November that there are a
number of Westminster Bills making provision about devolved matters in Scotland which
may still be before Parliament when the Scottish Parliament takes up its powers.
4.
It is obviously for you to judge whether the advantages of UK-wide implementation
of the 1980 Convention
this year outweigh the awkwardness
of asking Westminster
to
legislate about a devolved matter.
The degree of awkwardness would of course depend on
the timing of the Bill. If it is done and dusted before the purdah period before the Scottish
elections, ie before the end of March, then there would not be a problem.
It would look
. particularly odd, on the other hand, for the Government to support the introduction of such
legislation during the purdah period before the Scottish Parliamentary election, and doing so
might be difficult to defend that as consistent with the impending devolution of primary
legislative competence to the Scottish Parliament.
And introduction
after the Scottish
1207BEA.DOC
Mr Miller
Copy to:
Mr»~
Mr~;;;s, CG
Mr Sinclair, CG, Sols
INTERNATIONAL
CRIMINAL
COURT
1.
I refer to your miriute of 14 December.
2.
I have very little to add to the comments made by Mr Rogers.
3.
It seems likely that everything that is required of us by the Statute will fall within
devolved competence.
However, I have not looked at the Statute in detail and I suppose it is
just possible that there night be something there that impi1;1geson a reserved area. You might
therefore want to substitute the first sentence of paragraph 7 of the draft submission,
with
).
something along the following lines:-
"In the circumstances, we suggest that the Secretary of State may wish to remind the
Foreign Secretary of the fact that the subject matter of the nec"essary legislation would
appear to fall entirely within the competence of the Scottish Parliament, insofar as it
relates to Scotland;"
4.
It might be worthwhile
emphasisingthe
fact that, assuming
that the Scottish
Executive were agreeable to legislation to enable the Statute to be ratified, the question of
whether or not the obligations relating to Scotland are included in a Westminster Bill or an
ASP should not in practice hold up the ratification of the Statute.
Wherever the provisions
eventually appear, the same work will require to be carned out to ~mable the necessary
legislation to be drafted.
Alison CouD
Solicitor's Office
~9
Division 2
G-B 10
Victoria Quay
a;· 40567
Fax: 0591
i~l~i.~J!~:2~7
".
Mr C Miller, lID
~~.
Copy to:
Miss Coull, Sols
~,~.
Mr Burgess, CG
Mr Sinclair, CG-Sols
u~
INTERNATIONAL
CRIMINAL COURT
\ (\ l 1.
1.
Thank you for your minute of 14 December.
2.
While I agree with the substance of the analysis in your draft submission, I think that
it needs to make the point a bit more strongly.
I suggest that both the submission and the
draft letter should refer to the fact that the Government has announced to Parliament that it
expects a convention to be established under which WestJ;ninster will not normally legislate
about devolved matters in Scotland without the consent 6f the Scottish Parliament.
In the
)
penultimate sentence of the draft letter, for example, I suggest that the final two sentences
might be replaced with something like the following:
"However,
we have announced to Parliament that we expect a convention
to be
established whereby Westminster will not normally legislate about devolved matters
in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.
The decision about
whether there should be separate Scottish legislation or whether to agree to a UK-wide
Bill at Westminster must therefore await the establishment of the Parliament and the
appointment of the Scottish Ministers."
3.
While what you say in the present second sentence of that paragraph may well be the
case, I do not think that it is necessary to make that particular point, and it might risk making
the Secretary of Stat,un-cooperative.
l.J\-.
4.
I should note that there has been quite a bit of thinking recently hereabout
how and
when the consent of the Scottish Parliament should be sought for UK-wide legislation.
The
thinking is summarised in Mr Walford's
minute of¥4'November,
which I am copying
@)
separately to you and Miss Coull.
~
5.
One other minor point: in paragraph 5 of the submission and the second paragraph of
the 4raft letter, it would be more accurate to say that the observation and implementation
of
international obligations is devolved. so far as the obligations relate to devolved matters.
DAVID ROGERS
Constitution Group
G-H93
Victoria Quay
Ext 45534
15 December 1998
SAS 12701.128
From: David Rogers
Constitution Group - Functions
7 December, 1998
Mr Beaton, SCA
Copy to:
Mr Walford, CG
Mr Ewing, CG'
Mrs Brannan, HD
Mr Ferguson, Liaison Division
Mr Mason, EID
Mr Jamieson, CG
Ms Hibbert, CG
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BILLS: VIENNA SALES CONVENTION
J
1.
I refer to your submission of 2 December seeking clearance for a handout Bill to be
introduced at Westminster which will partially cover devolved matters in Scotland.
2.
The Government
announced
in the summer that it expects a convention
to be
established whereby Westminster will not normally legislate about devolved matters without
the consent of the Scottish Parliament.
There has been quite a bit of thinking recently about
the circumstances
this should happen, how the Scottish Parliament's
consent should be
obtained, and in particular the arrangements which need to be made for those Bills which may
be going through Parliament at the time when the Scottish Parliament assumes is powers. We
are drafting guidance on the point.
Rather than going on at length about the conclusions
which have been reached, I am sending you the relevant correspondence with the hard copy
of this minute.
Mr Walford's
minute of 19 November
summarises the CG and Liaison
Division thinking.
3.
You will see trom the annex to Mr Ferguson's minute of 11 November that there are a
number of Westminster Bills making provision about devolved matters in Scotland which
may still be before Parliament when the Scottish Parliament takes up its powers.
4.
It is obviously for you to judge whether the advantages of UK-wide implementation
of the 1980 Convention
this year outweigh the awkwardness
of asking Westminster
to
legislate about a devolved matter.
The degree of awkwardness would of course depend on
the timing of the Bill. If it is done and dusted before the purdah period before the Scottish
elections, ie before the end of March, then there would not be a problem.
It would look
. particularly odd, on the other hand, for the Government to support the introduction of such
legislation during the purdah period before the Scottish Parliamentary election, and doing so
might be difficult to defend that as consistent with the impending devolution of primary
legislative competence to the Scottish Parliament.
And introduction
after the Scottish
1207BEA.DOC
Parliament is in place would be even more awkward unless its consent is to be sought.
DAVID ROGERS
Constitution Group
Area G-H93
Victoria Quay
Ext 45534
7 December 1998
1207BEA.DOC
Document Outline
