Convener's Report
The clerk has put together a paper to ask for the support of the conveners liaison group for the funding of our meeting in the Borders. That will be discussed later this afternoon.
We could save around £800 if the meeting were held on a Monday rather than a Tuesday, as no extra broadcasting staff would have to be brought in. Do we agree to meet on a Monday? It will save the taxpayers' money.
I am happy to accommodate that.
I cannot make it on a Monday.
I might not be able to make it, but I am more than happy for other members to go. I think that we only need three members for the meeting to be quorate.
The clerk can consult members. If it possible to get a quorum together, we will go on the Monday, to save money. If not, we will go on a Tuesday.
I presume that it would also be cheap on a Friday. Does that help you, Pauline?
I do constituency work on Mondays and Fridays. I am on the Justice and Home Affairs Committee, which might have an impact on my time at that point. Sandra White's suggestion is the best. We should see who is available.
We will try to get three or four members together.
At the last meeting, we asked if Professor Hamblen, the chairman of the Greater Glasgow Health Board, would discuss with the committee his decision not to agree to a request to delay the decision on a secure care centre at Stobhill general hospital. He said that he was unable to attend this afternoon because of other commitments but is happy to attend on 15 February.
The suggestion is that that meeting should take place in committee room 1, to allow television coverage, as there might be some interest in the proceedings. Professor Hamblen will be present at our next meeting. We could convene 15 to 20 minutes before the start of the meeting, to discuss the line of questioning that we might want to pursue with Professor Hamblen. Is that agreed?
Yes.
The final item is the letter from Mr Ken Murray, which was addressed to me, I presume, as convener. I do not have a copy of the letter here. Mr Murray states strong views about the meeting that was held in Glasgow, which was attended by Paul Martin, the MSP for Glasgow Springburn, and Councillor Charles Kennedy. He makes remarks about those individuals in his letter.
What does the committee think that we should do with this letter? Should we refer it to the Health and Community Care Committee, as part of the evidence that it should be considering, or copy it to Paul Martin?
It is a personal letter, is it not, from someone who holds a contrary view to that of someone else? Paul Martin should receive a copy of it.
It is sent under the heading of the Glasgow Association for Mental Health, of which Mr Murray is the chair. It has been copied to Donald Dewar, Susan Deacon, Professor Hamblen and me. The Presiding Officer has also received a copy, so Paul Martin should be sent a copy.
Should we pass the letter to the Health and Community Care Committee, to be considered as part of its evidence?
I find the letter a little offensive. The final paragraph says:
"My final point is to suggest to you that you should not be sidetracked by the overtures made by Mr Martin."
My goodness, that is what an MSP is for—to make overtures to people. I will go along with your suggestion, convener.
I presume that David Steel has copied the letter to Paul Martin, as it mentions him. If that has not been done, Paul Martin should be sent a copy.
I do not think that the letter requires any other action, and I agree with what Helen Eadie says. Whether or not Mr Murray, or any of us, agrees with Paul Martin's actions, it is legitimate behaviour for any MSP to state whatever they think is appropriate in the context of protesting on behalf of their fellow members. I would defend any member's right to do that. It should be made clear to Mr Murray, when he attends this committee, that we are not here to hear his views on the matter.
Mr Murray will not attend this committee. Professor Hamblen, the chair of Greater Glasgow Health Board, will attend the committee.
You are right and I was wrong. Mr Murray did not address the letter to me as the convener of the Public Petitions Committee. He addressed the letter to David Steel as the Presiding Officer, so it is for David Steel to decide what further action to take.
Is there any other competent business?
No.
I thank you all for attending.
Meeting closed at 14:57.