Disappointed but not surprised by the Supreme Court ruling on my European Charter of Local Self-Government (Incorporation) (Scotland Bill. 1/7 supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-202…
The question before the court was not about the merits of the Bill but about whether its provisions modifed s28(7) of the Scotland Act 1998 and on the proper application of s 101(2) of the Scotland Act 1998. 2/7
In short the Bill provided for limits to be placed on existing legislation where it breached the European Charter. The limits would only apply to devolved matters but (importantly) would apply to UK laws on devolved matters 3/7
Most of Scots law in the devolved space is still governed by UK statutes. The Supreme Court ruled that provisions of the European Charter Bill purport to modify the powers of UK to legislate and to qualify the provisions of Uk statutes thus being outwith competence of the SP 4/7
The Bill will now proceed to a reconsideration stage. The amendments required to resolve the incompatibility are straightforward (limit the provisions to ASPs). But it raises a wider point about the Scotland Act. 5/7
Devolved powers are covered by SP acts & UK Acts - it is clear now that UK Acts r 2b treated differently from SP Acts despite both covering devolved areas. One solution is a consolidating Bill introduced to SP that mirrors as much of UK law in devolved areas as possible. 6/7
Meanwhile, expect a huge amount of nonsense to be talked about this ruling - this is just the first I spotted this morning - all of which is completely untrue. 7/7

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Andy Wightman

Andy Wightman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @andywightman

6 Oct
Can I attempt to give a practical example of what today’s Supreme Court ruling means. Both Bills incorporate international treaties and provide judicial remedies where a Court finds that any provision of the UN or CoE treaties have been violated. 1/5
So, for example, if a local authority were to consider that a decision by Scottish Ministers violated an Article of the European Charter, it could launch a judicial review of that decision. 2/5
As passed, the Bill provides that courts could find in favour of the authority & issue a declaration of incompatibility. This could be made under the Bill as passed provided that the matter complained of is a devolved matter (irrespective of whether a UK or a SP statute) 3/5
Read 6 tweets
28 Jul
1/7 This is an important & timely investigation into a bizarre and opaque parliamentary procedure that badly needs reform. Under Rule 9.11 of SAP standing Orders, no Bill can be debated at Stage 3 unless Queens Consent (QC) has (if needed) been obtained. theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/j…
2/7 QC is an effective veto by the Monarch on any legislation affecting the prerogative or the hereditary revenues of the Crown or (& this is bizarre bit) the personal property or personal interests of the Crown (in reality, the personal property of the Queen such as Balmoral.
3/7 So as part of formal legislative process, Queen & the Prince & Steward of Scotland have opportunity to influence legislation in order to protect their personal interests. There is no justification for this. But it is mandated by Scotland Act and thus a longer term challenge.
Read 7 tweets
18 Feb
THREAD - Neil Bibby MSP introduced the Tied Pubs (Scotland) Bill to Parliament to give greater protections to the tenants of Tied Pubs. The Bill was controversial with opinion sharply divided between the interests of tenants and landlords. 1/8
The @SP_Economy Committee recommended that Parliament reject the Bill at Stage 1. Only @RhodaGrant and myself dissented and recommended the Bill be supported. 2/8
At Stage 1, Parliament rejected the Committee’s recommendation and passed the Bill at Stage 1 in November with 107 MSPs voting Yes, none voting No and 4 abstentions. 3/8
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(