Standards and Public Appointments Committee, 01 Nov 2005

Meeting date: Tuesday, November 1, 2005

Official Report 131KB pdf

---

Scottish Commissioner for Human Rights Bill

We move to our final item, on the call for evidence on the Scottish Commissioner for Human Rights Bill. We have received a paper about the call for evidence and a letter from the convener of the Justice 1 Committee, seeking our views on the Scottish Commissioner for Human Rights Bill. At this stage, we are considering the general principles of the bill rather than its details. Although some of the formal provisions in the new bill in respect of appointments, terms and conditions, and reports to Parliament are similar to those that apply to the standards commissioner, it is worth keeping in mind the fact that the two posts are very different in purpose and responsibility. Other existing commissioner and ombudsman posts might be more relevant as comparators than our commissioner would be.

Members have copies of a draft response in annex B. Are there any views on the draft?

The draft response is comprehensive and to the point. If we were to agree the draft response, we would obviously want to add, as has been suggested, the penultimate paragraph before the summary on page 6, to say that we have revoked the policy that we have just revoked. On that basis, I think that the draft response meets its purpose and that we should agree it.

I agree. It could be argued that the previous debate illustrates the value of having some things set out in directions that the committee can change in the light of experience without going through a long parliamentary or other procedure. We have said the right thing, but we could perhaps underline that point, given our experience.

Are members content with Mr Gorrie's suggestion?

Members indicated agreement.

The clerks will take that on board and I shall sign the letter when it appears before me.

I arranged to have a paper circulated on my visit to Serbia, but I cannot remember whether it is among members' papers today.

Yes, it is. The paper was interesting.

It is really just for information, to show that we did go and do what we said we would do. It is not there for comment.

Our next meeting is likely to be on 29 November. We have a meeting pencilled in for 15 November, but there is no indication at this stage that we will require that meeting.

I give my apologies in advance for my being unable to attend the meeting on 29 November.

Thank you. I declare the meeting closed and thank members for attending.

Meeting closed at 11:46.