Official Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Human Rights and the Work of the Scottish Land Commission
Human Rights and the Work of the Scottish Land Commission A discussion paper Dr Kirsteen Shields May 2018 LAND LINES A series of independent discussion papers on land reform issues Background to the ‘Land Lines’ discussion papers The Scottish Land Commission has commissioned a series of independent discussion papers on key land reform issues. These papers are intended to stimulate public debate and to inform the Commission’s longer term research priorities. The Commission is looking at human rights as it is inherent in Scotland’s framework for land reform and underpins our Strategic Plan and Programme of Work. This, the fifth paper in the Land Lines series, is looking at the opportunities provided by land reform for further realisation of economic, social and cultural human rights. The opinions expressed, and any errors, in the papers are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Commission. About the Author Dr Kirsteen Shields is a Lecturer in International Law at the University of Edinburgh’s Global Academy on Agriculture and Food Security and was recently a Fullbright / Royal Society of Edinburgh Scholar at the University of Berkeley, California. She has advised the Scottish Parliament on land reform and human rights and was the first Academic Fellow to the Scottish Parliament’s Information Centre (SPICe) in 2016. LAND LINES A series of independent discussion papers on land reform issues Summary Keywords Community; property rights; land; human rights; economic; social; cultural Background This report provides a primer on key human rights developments and obligations relevant to land reform. It explains the evolution in approach to human rights that is embodied in the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016 and it applies that approach to aspects of the Scottish Land Commission’s four strategic priorities. -
2011-Holyrood-Manifesto.Pdf
SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT MANIFESTO 2011 This is a crucial election. UK Ministers are cutting our public services, and all the other Holyrood parties are debating how to do exactly the same. Governments of all colours in London and Edinburgh have neglected our environment, let inequality widen, and narrowed our politics. Only Greens are offering an alternative to this failed agenda. We’ll raise revenue from the wealthy and from big business, and invest in the things that matter. We think the Scottish Parliament was created for this. We’ll protect Scotland’s public services, and build the low-carbon economy the others only talk about, to cut energy bills, create jobs and tackle climate change. If you agree, make your 2nd vote Green on 5th May 2011. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3 A Green alternative to public service cuts 4 Local roots for a local economy 6 Building a fairer and more sustainable economy 8 Secure, safe and sustainable energy 10 A public transport renaissance 12 Caring for our most valuable natural assets 14 Education as a social good to be funded collectively 16 Supporting Scotland’s diverse communities 18 A healthy society, not just one that picks up the pieces 20 Promoting justice and crime prevention 22 A deeper devolution and a responsible Scotland 24 THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A MORE IMPORTANT TIME TO VOTE GREEN he Scottish Green Party has been a part of Scotland has an alternative. Even within existing devolved Scottish devolution since the beginning. We have powers, Greens believe that it’s possible to protect public Tconsistently brought a fresh approach to politics, services, build the inclusive good society which people and a challenge to the other political parties on the crucial in Scotland want to live in, and invest in the skills and issues which our world faces. -
Edinburgh Voluntary Organisations' Council 525 Ferry Road Edinburgh
Edinburgh Voluntary Organisations’ Council 525 Ferry Road Edinburgh EH5 2FF Wednesday, 10 June 2020 Edinburgh: Ash Denham MSP; Ruth Davidson MSP; Ben Macpherson MSP; Gordon MacDonald MSP; Daniel Johnson MSP; Alex Cole-Hamilton MSP. Regional: Alison Johnstone MSP; Andy Wightman MSP; Sarah Boyack MSP; Neil Findlay MSP; Gordon Lindhurst MSP; Miles Briggs MSP; Jeremy Balfour MSP. Cc: Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister Aileen Campbell, Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Local Government Jean Freeman, Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport Ben Macpherson, Minister for Public Finance and Migration Kevin Stewart, Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning Paul Johnson, Director General for Education, Communities and Justice Dear Members of the Scottish Parliament, RE: FOOD FUND DEPLETION AND THE EFFECT UPON VULNERABLE CITIZENS • The Scottish Government investment through the Food Fund in Edinburgh is depleted following the provision of approximately 27,000 meals per week to many of our Capital’s most vulnerable people. This has been carried out by numerous small local organisations with coordination support through the Edinburgh Third Sector Interface. • Despite the best efforts of City of Edinburgh Council, we are currently not being made aware of any plans, from Scottish Government, to deliver a further investment into this fund – which will run out before Monday 15th June 2020 – leaving thousands of vulnerable people at significant risk. • The risks include the obvious health and social care challenges but perhaps more importantly, potentially forcing those who are at increased risk of serious illness or those who could potentially infect others to leave isolation to go to supermarkets, utilise public transport or attend food banks. -
Foi-18-00465
ANNEX ANNEX Case Number Summary of Case Decision Exemption/Exception applied FoI/16/01789 Correspondence including emails in relation to The Partial 30(b)(i);30(b)(ii);38(1)(b); Council Tax Reduction (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Release Regulations 2016 since 18 October 2016. FoI/16/01829 To provide written information on the development of Partial camping management byelaws by loch Lomond and Release The Trossachs National Park or Scottish Ministers FoI/16/01842 Request for access to a file HH51/460 Refuse 31(1); FoI/16/01845 Details of contracts Scottish Government has with Partial 17;25;33(1)(b);38(1)(b); Warmworks Scotland & Energy Saving Trust Release FoI/16/01866 No of claims received in the last 3 years for damage to Partial 17; cars arising from potholes on A75, A77 & A76. How Release many claims were approved and the annual amount of compensation paid, how many were rejected and how many are to be resolved FoI/16/01873 All communications held by TS relating to accidents, Partial R10(4)(a);R10(4)(d);R11( design, inspections, reviews, investigations or safety Release 2); concerns for the A825 between Creagan and Benderloch from January 2015 FoI/16/01874 Correspondence, minutes of meetings and other Partial 25;30(b)(i); communications between the Scottish Government Release and Transport Scotland and Network Rail, local authorities or SPT regarding (a) Glasgow Crossrail and (b) electrification of the East Kilbride line. FoI/16/01876 training in NRs surrounding civil registration Partial 17; Release FoI/16/01877 Information on setting in Scottish schools. -
Planning (Scotland) Bill
Planning (Scotland) Bill 5th Groupings of Amendments for Stage 2 (Revised) This document provides procedural information which will assist in preparing for and following proceedings on the above Bill. The information provided is as follows: • the list of groupings (that is, the order in which amendments will be debated). Any procedural points relevant to each group are noted; • a list of any amendments already debated; • the text of amendments to be debated on the fifth day of Stage 2 consideration, set out in the order in which they will be debated. THIS LIST DOES NOT REPLACE THE MARSHALLED LIST, WHICH SETS OUT THE AMENDMENTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY WILL BE DISPOSED OF. Groupings of amendments Declining to determine an application 257, 145, 146, 147 Determination of applications and conditional grant of permission 318, 80, 141, 208, 294, 324, 331, 323, 323A, 230, 263, 335 Fees for planning applications etc. 259, 260, 261, 262, 332, 264, 265, 321, 266, 16 Call-in of applications by Scottish Ministers 15, 144, 22, 142 Development orders: Gypsy and Traveller sites 164 Development orders: private ways 165 Development orders: drinking establishments 316 Determination of applications: statement whether in accordance with development plan 58, 58A Appeal rights 51, 59, 60, 92, 143, 325, 319 Material considerations: meaning to be prescribed 88 Planning obligations 98, 166, 320, 317 SP Bill 23-G5 (Revised) Session 5 (2018) Compensation 314, 333, 315 Training and performance of planning authorities 326, 327, 328, 310, 311, 312, 23, 313, 24, -
Table of Statutes
Table of Statutes Commonwealth Constitution: 297 s 9: 296 Ch III: 5, 14, 15, 234, 363, 370, 372, 391, s 10: 296 397, 398, 404-406, 410 s 11: 296 s 1: 391, 422, 436 s 12: 17 s 7: 417, 422, 423, 425, 428, 429, 432, s 13: 296 436, 441 s 14: 296 s 8: 436 s 15: 17, 18, 296 s 15: 180, 193 s 15(1): 6 s 16: 436 Australia (Request and Consent) Act s 24: 416, 417, 422-425, 428, 429, 432, 1985: 296 436, 441 Australian Capital Territory (Self-Gov- s 29: 422 ernment) 1988 s 30: 422, 436 s 22: 66 s 49: 317 Broadcasting Act 1942 s 51: 65 Pt IIID: 426 s 51(xxix): 233 Builders Labourers Federation (Cancel- s 51(xxxi): 380 lation of Registration) Act 1986: 367, s 51(xxxv): 426 370 s 51(xxxvii): 3 Builders Labourers Federation (Cancel- s 51(xxxviii): 3, 281, 285, 287, 288 lation of Registration – Conse- s 53: 191 quential Provisions) Act 1986: 367 s 57: 185, 192 s 7: 368 s 61: 391 Builders Labourers Federation Legis- s 71: 14, 384, 391, 396, 397, 399 lation Amendment Act 1990: 389 s 73: 384 Commonwealth Electoral Act 1902: 422 s 74: 273 Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904: s 77(iii): 14, 384, 396, 399, 405 367 s 80: 380 Constitution Alteration (State Debts) Act s 90: 66, 67 1929: 142 s 92: 380 Customs Act 1901: 66 s 105A: 142, 144, 148 Financial Agreements (Commonwealth s 105A(3): 144 Liability) Act 1932: 143 s 105A(5): 144 Financial Agreements Enforcement Act s 106: 78, 79, 234, 352, 371, 432, 440 1932: 143, 146, 152, 157 s 107: 356, 357 Pt II: 144 s 116: 380 Financial Agreements (State Legislation) s 117: 380 Act 1932: 148 s 128: 18, 115-117, 429, 434 -
Defamation Act 2013 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 05 September 2021
Changes to legislation: Defamation Act 2013 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 05 September 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) View outstanding changes Defamation Act 2013 2013 CHAPTER 26 An Act to amend the law of defamation. [25th April 2013] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— Requirement of serious harm 1 Serious harm (1) A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant. (2) For the purposes of this section, harm to the reputation of a body that trades for profit is not “serious harm” unless it has caused or is likely to cause the body serious financial loss. Commencement Information I1 S. 1 in force at 1.1.2014 by S.I. 2013/3027, art. 2 Defences 2 Truth (1) It is a defence to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true. (2) Subsection (3) applies in an action for defamation if the statement complained of conveys two or more distinct imputations. 2 Defamation Act 2013 (c. 26) Document Generated: 2021-09-05 Changes to legislation: Defamation Act 2013 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 05 September 2021. -
Rethinking Sullivan: New Approaches in Australia, New Zealand and England
The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 2002 Rethinking Sullivan: New Approaches in Australia, New Zealand and England Susanna Frederick Fischer The Catholic University, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Torts Commons Recommended Citation Susanna Frederick Fischer, Rethinking Sullivan: New Approaches in Australia, New Zealand and England, 34 GEO. WASH. INT’L L. REV. 101 (2002). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RETHINKING SULLIVAN: NEW APPROACHES IN AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, AND ENGLAND SUSANNA FREDERICK FISCHER* "This is a difficult problem. No answer is perfect." - Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead in Reynolds v. Times Newspapers1 SUMMARY This Article employs a comparative analysis of some important recent Commonwealth libel cases to analyze what has gone wrong with U.S. defa- mation law since New York Times v. Sullivan and to suggest a new direc- tion for its reform. In Lange v. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Lange v. Atkinson, and Reynolds v. Times Newspapers, the highest courts of the Australian, New Zealand, and English legal systems were con- fronted with the same challengefaced by the U.S. Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan. They had to decide the proper constitutionalbal- ance between protection of reputation and protection of free expression in defamation actions brought by public officials over statements of fact. -
Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee
Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee Tuesday 5 February 2019 Session 5 © Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Information on the Scottish Parliament’s copyright policy can be found on the website - www.parliament.scot or by contacting Public Information on 0131 348 5000 Tuesday 5 February 2019 CONTENTS Col. DECISION ON TAKING BUSINESS IN PRIVATE ....................................................................................................... 1 CONSTRUCTION AND SCOTLAND’S ECONOMY ..................................................................................................... 2 ECONOMY, ENERGY AND FAIR WORK COMMITTEE 5th Meeting 2019, Session 5 CONVENER *Gordon Lindhurst (Lothian) (Con) DEPUTY CONVENER *John Mason (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP) COMMITTEE MEMBERS *Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab) *Colin Beattie (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) *Angela Constance (Almond Valley) (SNP) *Jamie Halcro Johnston (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Dean Lockhart (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gordon MacDonald (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) *Andy Wightman (Lothian) (Green) *attended THE FOLLOWING ALSO PARTICIPATED: Steven Dillon (Unite the Union) Hew Edgar (Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors in Scotland) Dr Stuart McIntyre (Fraser of Allander Institute) John McLaren (Scottish Trends) Simon Rawlinson (Construction Leadership Council) Ian Rogers (Scottish Decorators Federation) CLERK TO THE COMMITTEE Alison Walker LOCATION The David Livingstone Room (CR6) 1 5 FEBRUARY 2019 2 Scottish Parliament Construction -
An Opportunity Lost: the United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law
Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 49 Issue 3 Article 4 4-1997 An Opportunity Lost: The United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law Douglas W. Vick University of Stirling Linda Macpherson Heriot-Watt University Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the European Law Commons Recommended Citation Vick, Douglas W. and Macpherson, Linda (1997) "An Opportunity Lost: The United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 49 : Iss. 3 , Article 4. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol49/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. An Opportunity Lost: The United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law Douglas W. Vick* Linda Macpherson** INTRODUCTION ..................................... 621 I. BACKGROUND OF THE ACT ....................... 624 I. THE DEFAMATION ACT 1996 ...................... 629 A. The New Defenses ......................... 630 B. The ProceduralReforms ..................... 636 C. Waiving ParliamentaryPrivilege ............... 643 III. AN OPPORTUNITY LOST ......................... 646 CONCLUSION ....................................... 652 INTRODUCTION The law of defamation in the United Kingdom remains -
Rent Pressure Zones: a Failed Policy
Policy Briefing November 2020 Rent Pressure Zones: a failed policy Andy Wightman MSP Member of the Scottish Parliament for Lothian region Introduction The Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) 2016 Act granted Scottish councils the power to ask Scottish Ministers to designate a Rent Pressure Zone (RPZ). An RPZ is an area within which tenants with private residential tenancies cannot have their rent raised by more than CPI plus 1% each year, for a duration of 5 years. To date, no council has made a formal application for an RPZ. This is not because councils are unaware of the problems faced by private tenants in their areas. It is because the legislation contained fundamental flaws that have prevented councils from gathering sufficient evidence to submit a request for an RPZ to be established. This short briefing paper looks at the background to the RPZ legislation, examines the work councils have done since the 2016 Act and makes recommendations for change. Why Rent Pressure Zones? Rent regulation has many different forms. Controls can be placed on rent rises, or on maximum rents. Controls can depend on location or length of tenancy; on whether a tenancy is new or pre-existing. Controls on rent rises can be pegged to inflation; to wages; to market rents. The United Kingdom has a long history of rent control in response to emergency situations – usually beginning with blanket controls that become increasingly complex over time before being removed. The Scottish Government’s stated intention behind the design of RPZs was to1: Protect existing -
'If You Build It, They Will Come' the Origins of Scotland's Country Parks
‘If you build it, they will come’ The Origins of Scotland’s Country Parks Volume 1 By: Phil Back A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Sheffield Faculty of Arts and Humanities Department of History May 2018 University of Sheffield: Department of History ‘If you build it, they will come’: The origins of Scotland’s Country Parks Phil Back Volume 1 Pollok Country Park, Glasgow (Author’s collection) Supervisors: Dr James Shaw, Dr Tim Baycroft, Dr Clare Griffiths and Dr Caoimhe Nic Dháibhéid Abstract Country parks emerged as a designated landscape type in the UK following legislation in the 1960s. Conceived initially as a solution to damaging impacts on the scenic and working countryside from visiting motorists, they were a response to alarmist forecasts of trends that would exacerbate these problems further. Although often mentioned in discussion of countryside policy, country parks have never been examined in depth in Scotland, where the applicability of this policy has generally been either ignored, or conflated with the experience of England & Wales. Yet recreational need in Scotland was very different, and requires specific examination, as does the solution provided. This thesis uses archive material, together with contemporary commentary, to explore countryside recreation policy in Scotland in the later twentieth century. It considers whether the factors influencing legislation in England & Wales were germane to Scotland as well, and whether the emergent Scottish policy reflected Scotland’s distinctive needs. The thesis explores the creation of the Countryside Commission for Scotland and the expectations placed upon it, together with its fundamental weaknesses.