- The Deputy Convener:
Are there any comments on the order?
- Christine May:
You might be sorry that you asked, given the number that could be made.
- Mike Pringle:
In my experience, this is probably the worst instrument that has come to our attention.
- The Deputy Convener:
What are we going to do about the order? Twenty different points needing clarification from the Executive have been pointed out to us.
- Christine May:
There are 20 substantive points detailed in the legal brief.
- Mike Pringle:
And then there are about another 150 minor points.
- The Deputy Convener:
We could do one or two things. We could go through the points now, or we could take them as read, send them all to the Executive and then deal with them when they come back.
- Mr Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
We should write to the Executive formally on the 20 substantive points, also pointing out the more minor points in our letter. There are about four and a half pages of mistakes listed in our legal brief. Frankly, that is an unacceptable level of error.
- The Deputy Convener:
I totally agree. However, rather than talking all those points on to the record now, we will wait until the responses come back to us next week.
- Mike Pringle:
I congratulate the people who found all those errors, but the problem is that, despite what I am sure were their best efforts, they might not have found all of them. It is like proofreading, as I was saying before the meeting: the fourth person proofreading something might still find mistakes. It would not surprise me at all if one or two points have been missed. Given the huge number of mistakes that have been found, it would be understandable if that were the case.
- The Deputy Convener:
The committee will give the impression that we are not exactly over the moon about the level of mistakes in the order. We would like pretty clear answers on what we are raising.
- Mike Pringle:
On what went wrong.