Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. News and events
  3. Legal news
  4. Holyrood bills face possible UK challenge

Holyrood bills face possible UK challenge

25th March 2021 | government-administration

The UK Government has threatened to challenge provisions in two bills newly passed by the Scottish Parliament.

Scottish Secretary Alister Jack has written to Deputy First Minister John Swinney warning that the Scottish Government's United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill, and Andy Wightman's member's bill to incorporate the European Charter of Local Self-Government, could affect the ability of the UK Government to legislate for Scotland and might be beyond Holyrood's competence.

Both bills were backed unanimously by MSPs after their final debates. The Scottish Government did not table amendments requested by Mr Jack to avoid a potential clash with UK legislation.

Mr Jack has four weeks from when each bill was passed by Holyrood to decide whether to refer it to the Supreme Court.

On the UNCRC Bill he wrote: "The UK Government has concerns with section 6 of the Bill relating to the legal obligations it could be seen to place on UK Government Ministers in reserved areas.

"This in turn means that the effect of the legislation may not be clear to citizens, stakeholders and those who may seek to use the legislation to test that relevant authorities are meeting their duties.

"The UK Government also has concerns with regards to sections 19-21 of the Bill. Our concern is that these sections of the Bill would affect the UK Parliament in its power to make laws for Scotland, which would be contrary to the devolution settlement (section 28(7) of the Scotland Act 1998)."

Similarly with Mr Wightman's bill, the Government "has concerns that sections 4 and 5 of this Bill... would also affect the power of the UK Parliament to make laws for Scotland, which would be contrary to the devolution settlement".

He continued: "I am aware that stakeholders in Scotland are keen to see that the UNCRC Bill is given royal assent as soon as possible.

"While the UK Government and Scottish Government have different views on the benefits of incorporating conventions into statute, as set out above we respect the Scottish Parliament’s ability to legislate on this in devolved areas.

"However, doubt about the competence of specific provisions in the bill serves no one."

Mr Jack added: "This need for clarity, not just for us, but for the children the UNCRC Bill is intended to protect and the stakeholders who represent them, is why I think it is essential that both governments respect the devolution settlement and we work collaboratively to resolve issues."

Click here to view the full letter.

Add To Favorites

Additional

  • News and events

In this section

  • Law Society news
  • CPD & Training
  • Blogs & opinions
  • Events
  • 75th Anniversary

Categories

  • civil litigation
  • criminal law
  • employment
  • obituary
  • careers
  • practice management
  • law society of scotland
  • government-administration
  • welfare/benefits
  • family-child law
  • reparation
  • professional regulation
  • property (non-commercial)
  • insolvency
  • consumer
  • human rights
  • mental health-adult incapacity
  • planning/environment
  • europe
  • information technology
  • immigration
  • education-training
  • executries
  • corporate
  • commercial property
  • agriculture-crofting
  • dispute resolution
  • risk management
  • intellectual property
  • client relations
  • tax
  • licensing
  • banking-financial services
  • trusts-asset management
  • reviews
  • opinion
  • For the public
  • Research and policy
  • Regulation
  • Journal online news
  • interview

News Archive

  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013

Related articles

  • Consultation explores support for learning disabilities
  • Ministers will not appeal s 35 ruling, nor withdraw bill
  • MSP committee majority backs Visitor Levy Bill
  • Too many Commissioners? MSPs to investigate
Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited