Standards Committee, 21 Nov 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, November 21, 2000

Official Report 132KB pdf

---

Cross-party Groups

Agenda item 3 is consideration of applications for recognition as cross-party groups. There are two applications, and members have copies of the forms that have been submitted. We shall take the applications in order.

The first application is a proposal to establish a cross-party group on tourism. Members will note from the papers that the first meeting of this group was not advertised in the cross-party bulletin, as is required in the code of conduct. The clerk has written to the proposer of the group, Maureen Macmillan, who has explained that MSPs and their staff, together with representatives from organisations outside the Parliament, were e-mailed to inform them of the initial meeting of the group. The application predates the clerk's revised guidance notes, which should go some way to preventing such problems from arising in the future. In all other respects, the application appears to conform to the rules on cross-party groups. Do members have any comments on the proposed application?

No information has been provided on subscriptions.

The group is not levying subscriptions. That information should be on the application form.

Are there any other points? If not, are members happy to approve this group?

Members indicated agreement.

The second application for consideration is a cross-party group on survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Do members have any comments on the proposed application?

Are there not a number of cross-party groups on that subject already?

There is a similar group, but it is not identified as a cross-party group for survivors of childhood sexual abuse. The application that we are considering is quite specific.

We all welcome the creation of interest in subjects of this nature, which are sensitive and important, but if there are parallel groups working on, for example, domestic abuse and other forms of abuse, the question arises whether it would make more sense for them to amalgamate rather than set up a separate cross-party group. I have no objection to this application if the applicants wish to go ahead with it, but I wonder whether they have considered coming under a wider umbrella.

I have been informed by the clerk that the nearest group is the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on men's violence against women and children, but that the proposed group on survivors of childhood sexual abuse is distinct from that. As far as the clerks are concerned, there is no overlap with other groups.

In that case, we should support it.

Are members happy to approve this group?

Members indicated agreement.

That brings us to the end of the meeting.

Meeting closed at 11:46.