The next item of business is consideration of business motion S2M-200, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a revised business programme.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees—

(a) as a revision to the programme of business agreed on 19 June— Wednesday 25 June 2003 after, followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions insert, followed by SPCB Motion on Membership of the Scottish Commission for Public Audit Thursday 26 June 2003 9:30 am Landfill (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2003 followed by Motion on Fireworks Bill - UK Legislation 2:30 pm Question Time 3:10 pm First Minister's Question Time followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Final Stage of Robin Rigg Offshore Wind Farm (Navigation and Fishing) (Scotland) Bill followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5:00 pm Decision Time followed by Members' Business - debate on the subject of S2M-110 Irene Oldfather: Valuing Carers and (b) the following programme of business— Wednesday 3 September 2003 2:30 pm Time for Reflection followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Executive Business followed by Debate on Procedures Committee's Report on First Minister's Question Time followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5:00 pm Decision Time followed by Members' Business Thursday 4 September 2003 9:30 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Executive Business 2:30 pm Question Time 3:10 pm First Minister's Question Time followed by Executive Business followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Business Motion 5:00 pm Decision Time followed by Members' Business—[Tavish Scott.]

I make it plain that we do not oppose the motion on the basis of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body motion on membership of the Scottish Commission for Public Audit. The issue that I want to raise relates to a debate held at this morning's meeting of the Health Committee on the Food Supplements (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/278). At the meeting, Shona Robison moved

"that nothing further be done" under the instrument. The motion was defeated by five votes to four, but there was good cross-party consensus among the four members opposed to the instrument.

The situation that we face is not the fault of the Health Committee.

Will the member give way?

I do not think that I am allowed to take an intervention.

You may.

I am astonished to hear Mr Crawford oppose the business motion on the basis of something that happened at this morning's meeting of the Health Committee, at which I was present. Is Mr Crawford attempting to undermine a decision that was taken at that meeting? The motion that was before us to annul the statutory instrument was defeated by five votes to four—as can happen in any committee of the Parliament. Is the member attempting to undermine that process?

It is clear that, like every committee of the Parliament, the chamber has a view on this matter, and it should be allowed to make that known.

It is no fault of the Health Committee that the construction of the original legislation ensured that the instrument could be brought before the Parliament only under the negative procedure. Had the affirmative procedure been used—as it was last week for the Water Industry (Scotland) Act 2002 (Consequential Provisions) Order 2003, which was discussed in the chamber for 45 minutes, and as it will be tomorrow for the Landfill (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2003—the story might have been different.

This is an important issue of considerable public interest. Our mailbags are becoming increasingly full with correspondence on the European food supplements directive. The chamber should discuss the matter, and we recommend that a debate be held on it. We oppose the motion on the basis that the Parliament has until 17 September to annul the instrument.

Mr Crawford said that there was a good cross-party consensus on the Health Committee—presumably a good consensus in favour of the Executive, given that the motion was defeated by five votes to four.

It is unfortunate that the SNP opposes the business motion and calls for a debate simply because the decision that was taken in committee did not go its way. The Health Committee has considered the matter fully. I understand that there was a three-hour meeting this morning and that Mr McCabe answered questions on the instrument for between an hour and a half and two hours. It is extraordinary to say that there has been no scrutiny of the instrument.

If members of the Health Committee—or any member—had concerns about the food supplements directive, the committee was the most appropriate forum in which to raise those. It is usually most appropriate for subordinate legislation to be considered in committee. When that happens, it does not make sense to duplicate in the chamber work that has been done elsewhere. If that is not the position of the SNP, it is setting a new policy precedent—that all matters debated in committee should be referred to the full Parliament for further consideration. The Executive does not support that position, and I suggest that Parliament will not support it. In my view, it would imply criticism of the committee system and we would be seen openly to question the ability of the Health Committee to scrutinise subordinate legislation.

On that basis, I ask members to support the business motion.

The question is, that motion S2M-200, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

There will be a division.

Division number 1

For: Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Baker, Mr Richard, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Eadie, Helen, Ferguson, Patricia, Gillon, Karen, Glen, Marlyn, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, May, Christine, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McMahon, Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Pringle, Mike, Purvis, Jeremy, Radcliffe, Nora, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mike, Scott, Tavish, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stone, Mr Jamie, Swinburne, John, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Against: Adam, Brian, Aitken, Bill, Brocklebank, Mr Ted, Byrne, Ms Rosemary, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Curran, Frances, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Fergusson, Alex, Fox, Colin, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gibson, Mr Rob, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Harvie, Patrick, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Johnstone, Alex, Kane, Rosie, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Margo, Martin, Campbell, Mather, Mr Jim, Matheson, Michael, Maxwell, Mr Stewart, McFee, Mr Bruce, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, Milne, Mrs Nanette, Mitchell, Margaret, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morgan, Alasdair, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Robison, Shona, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Tosh, Murray, Turner, Dr Jean, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra

The result of the division is: For 65, Against 50, Abstentions 0.

Motion agreed to.

That the Parliament agrees—

(a) as a revision to the programme of business agreed on 19 June— Wednesday 25 June 2003 after, followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions insert, followed by SPCB Motion on Membership of the Scottish Commission for Public Audit Thursday 26 June 2003 9:30 am Landfill (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2003 followed by Motion on Fireworks Bill - UK Legislation 2:30 pm Question Time 3:10 pm First Minister's Question Time followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Final Stage of Robin Rigg Offshore Wind Farm (Navigation and Fishing) (Scotland) Bill followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5:00 pm Decision Time followed by Members' Business - debate on the subject of S2M-110 Irene Oldfather: Valuing Carers and (b) the following programme of business— Wednesday 3 September 2003 2:30 pm Time for Reflection followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Executive Business followed by Debate on Procedures Committee's Report on First Minister's Question Time followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5:00 pm Decision Time followed by Members' Business Thursday 4 September 2003 9:30 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Executive Business 2:30 pm Question Time 3:10 pm First Minister's Question Time followed by Executive Business followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Business Motion 5:00 pm Decision Time followed by Members' Business