Official Report 131KB pdf
Welcome to this meeting of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee.
No. The remit has not changed significantly since the group operated in the previous session. The only reason why we are being treated as making a new registration is that we did not quite get our act in gear in time to meet the 90-day deadline. However, the group is essentially the same as the one that existed in the previous session.
If members have no questions for Patrick Harvie, do we agree to approve the establishment of the group?
The second proposed cross-party group that we are considering today is the cross-party group on learning disability. I welcome Jackie Baillie and Pauline McNeill to the committee. Jackie Baillie is the group's convener. Do you have any comments that you wish to make, Jackie?
No. I think that you have all the information in the papers before you, convener.
Do members have any questions on the establishment of the cross-party group?
I have no questions, but I should declare an interest, in that I am a member of the proposed group.
I am also a member of the proposed group.
If members have no questions, do we agree to approve the establishment of the group?
The third group seeking our approval today is the proposed cross-party group on Palestine. I welcome Pauline McNeill, the group's convener, to the meeting.
The group began in 1999 or thereabouts, and I took over as convener in 2001. We have periodically had problems in getting members of all the main parties to sign up to what is an important group—certainly, despite my best efforts, I cannot persuade members of the Conservative party to join us this year. Members will see from the remit that, essentially, we have been raising awareness and, in particular, making links with regard to devolved issues—it is quite a specific remit. We have a fair representation from other parties, and I ask the committee to note that, of the two vice-conveners, one is from the Green party and the other is Margo MacDonald, the only independent member in the Parliament. Unfortunately, I am unable to get anyone from one of the main parties, the Conservative party, to sign up, but I have virtually everybody else signed up to the group and I hope that the committee will take that into consideration.
Thank you. Before we take questions, will you tell us the purpose of the £1 membership subscription? That is a question that has come up with other groups as well.
We decided to introduce that subscription in this session—we had not done it in previous sessions. It is mainly because we wanted to make it clear who was able to vote should a dispute ever arise, which it never has—there has only been one argument, which was with a member who joined but did not really sign up to the aims of the cross-party group. The subscription is a way to ensure that everyone who joins clearly understands the aims of the cross-party group—when they make the commitment to join, they pay a nominal fee of £1 and that entitles them to vote on any matters that arise.
Okay. Do members have any questions?
I thank Pauline McNeill for the detail that she has given us on the matter. Again, I declare an interest, as my name appears on the group's membership list.
I will ask the clerks. I know that the group was agreed to on that basis in the previous session.
You are not setting a precedent—each case is dealt with individually on its own merits. I understand that there was at least one occasion in session 2 on which a cross-party group that did not have members from each of the parties represented on the Parliamentary Bureau was approved.
Thank you.
MSPs from all parties except one have indicated an interest in forming the group, which has very laudable aims. I propose that, in this case, we grant approval to the establishment of the cross-party group on Palestine.
I was going to say the same thing. There is coverage across all parties, apart from the Conservative party, and the independent member is involved too. That shows that there is good cross-party support for the group within the Parliament.
I express my agreement as well, and I declare an interest, as I am a member of the group. I also apologise for not declaring that I am a member of the first cross-party group that we discussed. I second Cathie Craigie's proposal.
If there are no other comments from members, are we agreed that the cross-party group be established and that we waive the rule in question?
The final proposed cross-party group is on visual impairment. I welcome Robert Brown, the group's convener, to the committee.
I will not say a great deal. The cross-party group on visual impairment is another group that has existed since the early years of the first session of Parliament. It represents a broad range of interests in the area and has done so throughout the period. I have been a member on and off before becoming convener in this session. We have a good turnout, with regular attendance at meetings.
Thanks very much. Does anyone have any questions for Robert Brown?
The group has declared £4,000 in section 5 of the registration form. Can you tell the committee a wee bit about that?
Yes. RNIB Scotland, which is one of the main supporters of the cross-party group, has, since the early years of the Parliament, received a donation from the education fund of Eli Lilly and Company. RNIB Scotland administers that donation, so it is not a direct grant to the cross-party group but it pays for the group's routine running expenses—sandwiches and things at lunch time, and so on. Importantly, it pays the travel expenses of blind and visually impaired people who attend the group, as there are different challenges in that regard.
Is this the first time that such a sum of money has been received by the group, or has it been received in previous years?
I have not been involved with the money directly before, but I understand that a similar donation has been made every year since the beginning of the Parliament. RNIB Scotland has a large fundraising potential, and the money is part of the funding that goes to the organisation. Its initial purpose is to support the cross-party group. It cannot be guaranteed indefinitely, however. Such funding is often made available for a certain period and another funding source has to be found later on but, so far, the cross-party group has been funded in that way.
Are there any conditions attached to the grant?
I do not think so. In a sense, it is at one remove from the cross-party group because it is a grant to RNIB Scotland rather than to the group. It is to be used for broad educational purposes. I understand that it was requested specifically to support the cross-party group, but there has usually been money left over that goes towards RNIB Scotland's more general purposes. Some of the funds that it receives are restricted in their use, but I do not think that this donation is.
Okay. There are no more questions. Is the committee minded to approve the application?