Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Procedures Committee, 08 Jun 2004

Meeting date: Tuesday, June 8, 2004


Contents


Work Programme

The Convener:

Agenda item 3 is the committee's forward work plan. It would be useful if we could decide at this meeting what our next inquiry is likely to be so that the clerks could give some thought to how to proceed before our next meeting. However, it is not essential that we do so if members wish to have more time to consider the matter, as long as we decide at our next meeting. There are three options for major inquiries: Sewel motions, private bill procedures and the parliamentary timetable. Which of those do members think that we should go with?

I would like time to consult other members to determine what their pressure points are and what they think are the most important issues. We can put the item on the agenda for our next meeting.

I am happy with that. If members want to say what they think our next inquiry should focus on, they can do that. Otherwise, we can bring the matter back to our next meeting, although we will have to make a decision then.

Members have been asking me whether the Procedures Committee is going to look at Sewel motions. I have said that we will.

Richard Baker:

I agree with Karen Gillon that it would be good for us to have some time to speak to other members before we make a final decision. I do not see a great groundswell of opinion on the need to review the parliamentary week. There is a fine line between whether we pursue option 1 or option 2 for our next major inquiry. Being on a private bill committee and having seen what Westminster has done, I believe that, at some point—whether as our next inquiry or not—we need to review those procedures and perhaps whether we should keep the private bill process in Parliament at all. There is, therefore, merit in pursuing option 2.

The Convener:

I hope that we will be able to deal with both those items within a reasonable timescale. Whichever we chose to take first, the other would follow soon after. I agree that, for various reasons, there are significant problems with the private bill procedures. I hope that, at our next meeting, we will be able to give serious consideration to pursuing both those options, although we may have to stagger our consideration of them within a reasonable timeframe. For the moment, shall we defer further discussion on the matter until the next meeting?

Members indicated agreement.

That concludes the public part of the meeting.

Meeting continued in private until 12:04.