We now move on to our discussion on future meetings. I thank members for their remarks so far. I understand from the clerks that, in the next few days, we are to receive a report from the acting Scottish parliamentary standards commissioner, which concerns a complaint that was made in the first session. There are also a couple of other issues that members may wish to raise. Are members content for the clerks to arrange further meetings, so that we can deal with that business? I believe that those meetings will be held before the summer recess.
I am not available next week, although I will be available the following week.
If I understand the timetable correctly, we will hold a meeting next Wednesday.
There are to be meetings on Wednesday 18 June and Wednesday 25 June, both at 9 am.
I am not able to make next Wednesday. That is rather short notice. It would be helpful if the meeting were postponed until the week following our receipt of the report from the standards adviser.
We do not have a lot of time before the summer recess. Normally, we would receive a report, discuss it, and then possibly hold a further meeting after that. We need a minimum of two meetings. With the exception of Alex Neil, would all members be able to attend a meeting next Wednesday?
What time did you say that the meeting next Wednesday is to be held?
At 9 o'clock.
And the other meeting?
That will be at 9 o'clock on the following Wednesday.
That will be our last opportunity before the summer recess.
Yes. Is there any other time that would be convenient next week? I do not have a timetable for any of the other committees; in fact, I am not sure whether they are meeting next week.
I think that there is a provisional timetable for next week, which I could circulate to members so that we can determine whether it would be possible to arrange another time. It depends on the availability of committee rooms and the arrangements of other committees.
What would be on our agenda next week? Would we just receive the report and then have the rest of the week in which to look at it and begin our work? What is the purpose of the meeting?
I hesitate to answer that from my previous experience on the Standards Committee, so I ask the clerk to say what will happen when we receive the report.
If we receive the report in time for next week, the committee will be required to undertake its initial consideration of the report then. It will need to consider whether it wishes to take evidence.
Given that, we should try to get all members to attend.
Would members be available on Tuesday instead? Would that be a possibility?
It might be, but I would need to consult colleagues in the committee office.
Let us agree Wednesday next week as a provisional date for our next meeting.
I could rearrange my schedule for Wednesday next week, but Tuesday would be much more difficult. If you are able to confirm that we will be meeting next Wednesday, I will make every effort to be here.
That is very generous. Can we agree to meet at 9 o'clock next Wednesday morning?
There are a number of outstanding issues that we will need to consider, but I do not think that today is the day to discuss the committee's future agenda. No legacy paper was left to us by the previous Standards Committee, but all members will be aware of the need to make progress on the matter of cross-party groups. Any member who has participated in cross-party groups will be aware of the current rule whereby all groups must have a member of each party that is represented on the Parliamentary Bureau. That rule was drawn up with four parties in mind, but we now find ourselves in different circumstances. We need to make progress on the whole cross-party groups issue, but I feel that we need to address that particular matter as soon as possible. I ask the clerks to prepare a paper on how we interpret the rule about the number of parties that ought to be represented for cross-party group purposes. That can be put on the agenda, if not for the next meeting then for the one after that.
That is an important issue. Many cross-party groups are scrabbling about a bit. Some members felt that they over-committed themselves to cross-party groups during the previous session, and they are tending to reduce their commitments, which makes it harder for groups to secure a quorum. It is important that we make progress on this important matter as soon as possible. I would have thought that we could perm four parties from six, but I do not want to write the report on this myself.
Indeed. A number of approaches have been suggested. My understanding is that the research paper on cross-party groups that we commissioned will not be ready until towards the end of the year. Everybody is in something of a holding position at the moment. The enthusiasm that we had during our freshers week, when we signed up to all the cross-party groups we could, has perhaps now evaporated.
Are there no other outstanding inquiries or complaints?
That is a good question. No legacy paper was left to us, but we could ask the clerks to prepare a paper for discussion at a future meeting. A number of items are outstanding. As part of our inquiry into lobbying, we drew up a bill that included the statutory registration of lobbying groups. Those provisions have not been implemented or passed into legislation. I think that the members' interests order under which we are currently operating is a temporary order.
I think that I read in the papers that the acting Scottish parliamentary standards commissioner has stayed on to deal with at least two cases. I presume that they relate to individual complaints against MSPs.
The acting commissioner is dealing with only one complaint that remains outstanding from the first session.
Sorry—I misunderstood the notes that I was reading.
We passed the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner Bill in the previous session, and we have appointed the new Scottish parliamentary standards commissioner. However, according to the terms on which we did that, the old, temporary commissioner had to finish off all the work in which he was involved.
Sorry—I was simply trying to establish the number of outstanding cases.
That is in fact quite a controversial point and I do not think that we should agree on it today. I assume that all members of this committee are members of other committees. I see that at least some of us are. At the same stage during the previous session, the committee office drew up a rough timetable for committee meetings. We ought to cast our eye to any timetable that has been drawn up and then make some suggestions.
That is very wise. We should wait and see.
Would it be helpful if the clerks were made aware of which other committees members of this committee are on, so that they can assess whether any clashes might arise?
Indeed.
We have access to that information. When the committee office draws up the timetables, it tries to factor out as many committee clashes as possible.
That is good to know. Members may still have a view on how often and when we meet, so we could put that on the agenda as one of the issues to be discussed next time.
Meeting closed at 14:44.
Previous
Deputy Convener