Health and Community Care Committee, 06 Nov 2002

Meeting date: Wednesday, November 6, 2002

Official Report 363KB pdf

---

Item in Private

Good morning. I welcome everyone to this meeting of the Health and Community Care Committee. Agenda item 1 is the suggestion that we take item 5 in private because, as a matter of courtesy to the committee, the Minister for Health and Community Care has offered to brief us on the forthcoming expert group's report on hepatitis C prior to its publication. Are there any comments?

Agreed.

I am opposed to the suggestion. I do not want to make a big deal about it, but there is an issue of principle here. The report has been eagerly anticipated by a lot of people, especially those who have been infected with hepatitis C. There is already some frustration that there has been a three-month delay. I know that there are people here today who want to hear what the minister has to say. I think that it would be wrong to exclude them from a discussion that affects their lives. Holding the briefing in private would do nothing to enhance the Parliament's reputation for openness. I know that the report is being published later today, but this morning's meeting will provide the first opportunity to question the minister and probe the thinking behind his response. People have a right to hear today's discussion.

In general, committees should not go into private session without good reason, and I am not convinced that there is a good reason in this case. The only reason that has been given is that the minister does not want to pre-empt the publication of the report, but we would do so only by a few hours. That would not be the end of the world. Had the minister been worried about that, I am not sure whether there was anything to stop him putting the report into the public domain in advance of this morning's meeting and allowing us to have an open discussion.

Nicola Sturgeon is simply at it this morning. The report is not the minister's report, but he is prepared to discuss his views on it. If we are briefed prior to publication, that must always be done in private, otherwise what is the point in having dates and times of publication? I propose that the item be taken in private.

I understand that the committee's involvement was inspired by petitions that were forwarded to it. I have not seen the report and do not know what is in it—I am therefore not qualified to question the minister closely about it. However, once I have read the report, I hope that the committee will invite the minister back to question him in public on its contents and the Executive's response to it. That will be more vital than this morning's briefing, which is simply a courtesy to the committee before the report goes public.

I suggest that we invite the minister to the committee within the next few weeks. We should have a chance to read the expert group's report. That will give us the scope to question the minister about it and we can consider whether we want to question the expert group on its work and any of the groups that are affected. That is the best way forward. I hope that we can then conclude the committee's long-standing involvement with the issue.

I share Nicola Sturgeon's frustration. Some members of the committee have been involved with the matter for years in one way or another—almost since we were elected. John McAllion is absolutely right. There have been two petitions and we have doggedly tried to ensure that the issue does not go away, but it has dragged on for a long time. Two ministers have been involved. I hope that, over the next few weeks, we can work to finalise the committee's involvement with the matter.

That the minister must definitely come back and be questioned openly puts a different complexion on the matter. I have not seen the report either—I have not even heard a hint of what is in it—but if there is any way of influencing the minister if what the committee wants is not being done, it might be better to influence him strongly in private in advance of questioning in public as soon as possible. That should happen next week, if possible, although I do not know whether our agenda makes it possible.

I do not want to prolong discussion about the matter. What members think is clear, but I want to record in the Official Report my opposition to going behind closed doors to discuss the issue.

With that dissent noted, are members happy to take item 5 in private on the basis of the minister's request and to find a spot in the next few weeks to question the minister in public? Having read the report, we can decide—possibly next week—whether we want to question anybody else at that time.

Members indicated agreement.