Visits
The next item on the agenda is a briefing paper on proposals for a programme of visits, for which I must thank Morag Brown, who is sitting quietly behind us as usual.
We have examined the systems of local government in a number of countries, including the United Kingdom, and are considering visits to counterpart committees at the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly. Northern Ireland is not covered in the paper because there were some difficulties there when it was written. We might want to consider visiting both north and south Ireland later.
The first page of the briefing paper has background information. Then it moves on to next steps. I ask members to discuss those, so that we are able to prioritise the visits. Does anyone have comments about the key objectives for visits to other parliamentary committees? Does anyone wish to add to the three objectives that Morag Brown suggested?
We could also look at the powers of local government. I notice that some of the Norwegian communes with populations of 10,000 or more have more powers than the Scottish Parliament, particularly with regard to social security, pensions and so on, which is quite interesting. We could investigate how such powers are integrated into the local government systems in those countries.
Okay—are there any objections?
The first priority should be to visit the parliamentary committees in the United Kingdom to see how they manage the devolution process.
Why? Is not this sufficient experience?
Will members please behave themselves?
Studying local government is more important than studying other parliamentary committees on local government. Therefore, we should concentrate on how local government really works in Denmark, Catalonia or wherever, which would involve some discussions with the relevant parliamentary committees. We are meant to be improving local government in Scotland, so we should examine local government in other countries.
In particular, I see no point in trotting down to Westminster to talk to people on select and standing committees, although it would be useful for some members to go—perhaps the convener, the vice convener, the clerk and a researcher. I do not think there would be a useful dialogue between the whole committee and those people down there. For what it is worth, there is not much point going to Northern Ireland or Wales either because, like us, they are beginning to learn how the system works—although it might be useful to visit them in a year or so.
It would, however, be valuable to visit at least one of the Scandinavian countries. They seem to have roughly similar systems, so one visit would be enough. We might also visit Catalonia, which sounds interesting.
Perhaps I should clarify this point. It was not my intention that the whole committee should go anywhere; rather, the idea was that we would divide up. I would be interested in visiting Northern Ireland at some point, on the basis that it does not have local government as we know it—voluntary organisations are used to do much of the work. Northern Ireland is also interested in what we are doing, so there will be invitations both ways. It will certainly come to me, but I would rather members of the committee went on a visit. Wherever and whenever we decide to go, it would not be a proper use of our time to send the whole committee.
The issues around how other countries manage local government and the separation of power between the different levels are very interesting, but we need to put them in context. We must ask ourselves to what purpose we would make such visits, other than the fact that they are interesting. We are considering local government finance, which is a major piece of work. Examining the structure of local government—how it works at a theoretical level and comparing different models—would be another significant piece of work. Visiting different countries and having an interest in those subjects without being able to take them further should not be our first priority.
Perhaps the phrase "other parliamentary committees" is misleading. I would be interested in considering how the Welsh Assembly relates to local government and what the local government issues are in Wales. Does it have an equivalent of COSLA? Is there tension between local government and the Assembly, given that its powers are different from those of the Scottish Parliament? There are similar questions to be asked in relation to Northern Ireland?
As a member of the Equal Opportunities Committee, I visited Northern Ireland to attend a day that focused on the women's agenda for the Northern Ireland Assembly and I was struck by how similar it was to the women's agenda that the Scottish Trades Union Congress produced for the Scottish Parliament. In the short term, it might be more useful to consider our powers and how the new structures are bedding in. We would need to be clear that the countries that we wanted to visit were selected for more than straightforward interest. I do not think that that is what you are suggesting, convener, but we would need a programme or goal.
I notice that one of the cities in Norway has something similar to metropolitan status. It would be interesting to go there, given what we have been arguing for Glasgow. However, that should not necessarily be the first priority of the Local Government Committee.
It is unfortunate that the Executive does not even recognise the concept of metropolitan status. We should remember that Oslo is about half the size of Glasgow.
It is important that we examine what is happening elsewhere in the UK. The Welsh Assembly is evolving, just as we are, and I am sure that it would welcome our involvement. No one is seriously suggesting that the whole committee should travel everywhere—I do not think that the Local Government committee on tour is an option. We can make visits as groups.
Although it is important that we consider what is happening in the rest of the UK, we should learn from what does not happen here. It is not simply that it is fascinating to examine systems in Scandinavia, but that they obviously work. We might examine local income tax and proportional representation—I appreciate that there is PR in Northern Ireland. Wherever we go, we can examine structures and exchange views and ideas with officials and politicians. We should consider how the systems are put together and what we can learn from one another.
It might be that the system in Norway or Denmark is too cumbersome and overly bureaucratic. Who knows until we have gone and had a look? I do not believe that they have all the answers and that we have none. We might have something to learn from them, but it might also be that we come back and decide that it would be better to continue to do things as we have done them. We should examine what is happening elsewhere in the UK, but we should also consider the situation in Catalonia and Scandinavia.
Eugene Windsor and I have discussed possible visits to Wales, Northern Ireland and London, to take place between September and December. If we divide up the trips, we should be able to do that. We will not be tackling the meat of the finance review until the following calendar year.
As far as Catalonia and the Nordic countries are concerned, it would be interesting to visit them but, as members have said, we need to have a clear programme so that we know why we are visiting and what we want to get out of it. I would find it interesting to visit one country that is within the European Union and one that is not, to discover if there are significant differences. Do countries outside the EU simply ignore the European convention on human rights, or do they work with it? That has serious implications for local authorities and might be worth some comparative consideration. However, that would take place well into next year.
I am seeking members' agreement for a programme in which we examine the other UK countries after the recess. We need to tighten up the reasons for our visits because I have to present those to the conveners committee.
There is a great deal of sense in what you say, convener. None of us can second-guess what Kerley will say, but it is conceivable that some of the recommendations will throw up questions about structures. We do not want to get into a holus-bolus reform of local government in Scotland—it was bad enough when it happened before. However, we should remind ourselves that, with all due respect to Keith Harding, at the time, that reform was politically driven and some of the solutions were less than perfect.
I have always thought that one council for the Highlands is too big. All parties realise that slight adjustments may have to be made in parts of Scotland, particularly in the light of the Kerley recommendations. That might be an important fact to remember as and when some of us visit Catalonia or Scandinavia.
As you suggested, convener, the other point is the importance of Ulster. At the moment, its councils have very few powers, apart from running leisure centres and taking away the bins. However, that is something that will change. If we are to help the fledgling democracy in Ulster, any contact must be good for them. We must show a supporting hand. The province has suffered from xenophobia and a "Who are you?" attitude. I would certainly back the suggestion of such a visit.
Do members agree that Johann Lamont and I will speak to Eugene Windsor and bring more detailed proposals back to the committee?
Members indicated agreement.