Social Justice Committee, 10 Jan 2001

Meeting date: Wednesday, January 10, 2001

Official Report 189KB pdf

---

Convener

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I wish all committee members a very happy new year and, on behalf of the committee, wish the same to all those officials and members of the public who watch over us so zealously.

It might come as a great surprise to everyone, but I am the oldest member of the committee. As such, in the absence of a convener or deputy convener, it is up to me to get the proceedings going. The committee now has a new name and has been truncated. Margaret Curran, the convener of the old Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee, has gone to the Executive and Fiona Hyslop has resigned. It falls upon me to preside over the election of the new convener. I understand that there will be no nomination of a deputy convener today.

The Parliament has laid down that the convener should be drawn from the ranks of the Scottish Labour party and, as a result, it is for the Labour party to put forward a nomination for the position. Do I have a nomination?

I nominate Johann Lamont.

Are you willing to accept the nomination, Johann?

I am indeed. Can I say something?

Certainly.

I thank the committee for the nomination and am very honoured to accept it. However, I want to make a statement, as I am aware that there has been some controversy about my taking over the convenership of the committee, which will be dealing with the Housing (Scotland) Bill. I currently sit on the management committee of the Glasgow housing association. I have always said that if a conflict of interest were identified in carrying out both functions, I would resign from one of them. It is very clear from the advice that has been given to me and to the GHA, and through the Parliament, that there is no such conflict of interest. In fact, I have been quite upset by the suggestion that carrying out this role within the GHA on behalf of my constituents in Glasgow to find the best possible package for the tenants would somehow prevent me from doing the very serious work of this committee. I am certainly content that the tenants of Glasgow will make the final decision on any proposal made by the GHA board.

However, I have always said that I wish to do nothing that will damage the important debate on housing ahead of the committee and across Scotland, or to damage the important work that has been done in Glasgow to find a lasting solution to the problems faced by tenants in the city. As I am also aware of the level of commitment that the convenership of the committee will entail, I have taken the decision to tender my resignation to the GHA so that I can focus my attention on the work of the committee and to ensure that there is no opportunity for those who seek to do so to obscure further the very important debate on the future of housing in Glasgow. I have informally informed the GHA of my decision and will be writing formally to the organisation today. My resignation will have immediate effect.

Thank you.

Johann Lamont was chosen as convener.

Do members have any comment on Johann Lamont's statement?

I welcome Johann Lamont's appointment today. I know that you are very able and look forward to working with you over the next few months and perhaps years, depending on whether we reorganise the committees yet again. Your decision with regard to your position on the GHA is wise and welcome. Whether or not there is a real conflict of interest, such a conflict could be perceived. Once again, I congratulate you on your appointment.

I welcome Johann Lamont to her current position and am very pleased that she has tendered her resignation from the GHA. Honesty and integrity are paramount in this Parliament and particularly in the running of the committees, which are the Parliament's most important aspect. It is excellent that every member, no matter which party they belong to, can work together. I look forward to working with Johann in future.

I also congratulate Johann Lamont on her appointment and look forward to working with her. It is worth while to add that, on the subject of the GHA's position, this is a major issue and she has taken the right decision. It is of supreme importance that conveners of parliamentary committees are seen to be independent of other interests. With an organisation such as the GHA, which executes policy in the housing field, although there is clearly no conflict of interest, Johann's decision today is appropriate. With the decks now cleared, the committee can proceed with a very interesting agenda over the next few months.

It was my view that there was a potential for some difficulty here. Although I have absolutely no doubt that Johann Lamont would have carried out her duties as I would have expected of her, the Parliament has to operate on the basis of the Caesar's wife syndrome. Not only must we be carrying out our duties impeccably, we must be seen to be doing so. As I said, there was a possibility of a conflict of interests. The decks have now been cleared, which is a relief to us all, and I congratulate Johann both on her stance and on her appointment as convener of the committee. I invite her to take the chair.

I thank committee members very much for those kind words. I hope that, now that people have seen the decks being cleared, the opportunities for mischief-making in Glasgow will be put to one side and that people can now engage in the hard debate about housing instead of chasing red herrings and obscuring people's motives and intentions concerning proposals for the city.

We now move to item 2 on the agenda, which is to agree whether we will take items 3, 8, 9 and 10 in private. Are members agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Meeting continued in private.

Meeting resumed in public.