Official Report 258KB pdf
I will go through the paper on future business point by point.
A lot of work.
We met Laurence Gruer, who is helping us to refocus the inquiry, and have made some progress on that.
We have had two meetings with him.
We are likely to bring the refocused remit of the inquiry to the next committee meeting as well as a report on our progress on the drugs adviser.
The only other issue is the question of allowing the clerk to advertise for written evidence. Although we will discuss the issue in more detail next week, we felt that, because of our fairly tight time scale, the sooner we advertise for written evidence, the better. Perhaps that should include not just writing to the 112 drugs agencies, the health boards and the local councils, but considering newspaper and other advertising to get the maximum amount of written evidence.
Are committee members agreed to that in principle?
Members indicated agreement.
Okay. I will move on unless someone stops me.
What is the purpose of meeting in Stirling?
We are moving a committee meeting to Stirling, which has to happen on a Monday. That means that we will not be meeting on Wednesday 23 February. By that stage, we might be able to incorporate some of the work on the drugs inquiry into our agenda.
Do we have an agenda yet?
Only what is mentioned in the paper on future business.
Are we going to Stirling for a specific reason or are we just getting out of Edinburgh?
That is the point that I wanted to make. Although I am all in favour of moving out of Edinburgh, scheduling a meeting without having a clear idea about what we are going to do is like writing a story to fit the headline.
Normal committee meetings do not have to be in Edinburgh.
Will it be a normal meeting?
Yes. Although we will try to fit other items into our agenda while we are in Stirling, the principle is that we can have normal committee meetings outwith this formal venue in Edinburgh.
I just feel strongly that we are going to run into trouble with the Parliamentary Bureau and the public. We should be going to a specific place for a specific reason, instead of going there just for the sake of doing so. Although I am delighted to meet elsewhere—the more we do it, the better—it is important that we arrange visits around such meetings. We could do a number of things in the Stirling area, such as visit Off the Record, which is a centre for young people and deals with drug-related issues, and integrate those into our meeting.
This is also a matter of principle. Although the Parliament building is in Edinburgh, that does not mean that normal committee meetings have to be held here. We do not need a special reason to have a meeting in Glasgow or Stirling. Perhaps we can return to this argument later.
The committee could have a normal meeting in Stirling on Monday 21 February and still have an evidence session with the minister on Wednesday 23 February.
Why does she want to change the date of the session?
All I know is what Martin has told me, which is that the minister might have more to announce.
Before or after our meeting?
Perhaps we should hear from the minister at the end of our housing stock transfer inquiry, because the more people we see before we see her, the better. It suits us very well to postpone her evidence.
Okay. We will hear from the minister later in February; however, we need to get the logistics right, because we are moving to Stirling that week. Is that agreed?
We are discussing housing benefit reform on 16 February anyway. The question depends on when the minister will have something useful for our inquiry. We should take her evidence on either 16 February or 23 February.
If John and Fiona will leave the matter with me, I will liaise with them about it. We certainly need to hear from the minister in February, because we have to bring out our report.
What general evidence will the minister give to the committee?
We do not know.
Then perhaps we should ask her. Such vague information is not satisfactory.
I think that the minister feels that, by that date, she will have more information for the committee. There is no indication that she is planning to make a particular announcement or statement.
I hesitate to mention the word "Glasgow".
We need to work out a format to tie visits and so on into our constituency diaries. For example, I would prefer to have visits or drug inquiry sessions on Mondays instead of Fridays; and if they can only take place on a Friday, we should be given as much notice as possible. That will help us to organise ourselves.
That is a useful suggestion. How does the rest of the committee feel about it? The small reporters groups tend to prefer Mondays rather than Fridays for their work sessions, but we can take the Friday if necessary.
The crucial point is that it should be either Monday or Friday, although I think Fridays are more for constituency business.
Point 13 on the future business paper deals with correspondence. A number of organisations that write to the committee address their correspondence to the appropriate reporters groups. Now that business such as the drugs inquiry is under way, we need to make sure that we do not lose track of correspondence.
I have one point. The Commission for Racial Equality has sent me an invitation to a conference; however, I have no idea about the procedure for conferences. Most organisations ask us to pay for them. As it is probably important either for you, convener, or for another committee member with a specific interest to go to some of those conferences—although we should be selective—we should develop a system that allows us to attend. Although we are not going to start paying out for such events, organisations are very keen for committee members to attend and there have already been a couple of invitations. Is there a fund to pay for such visits?
We would need clarification about whether such a fund exists. However, we certainly need some system to make sure that committee members can attend key events. I am worried that we are not being properly represented.
What is this informal working lunch on Monday, and what are we working on?
At a previous meeting, I mentioned that we had been approached by the Scottish Affairs Select Committee, which is conducting an inquiry into poverty in Scotland. You know a lot about this, John.
I am not a member of that committee any more; I resigned.
The select committee was keen to establish cordial relations with us to prevent turf wars developing. I met the chairman of the committee, David Marshall, and we told each other about what we were doing. In the light of that meeting, I thought it best that the full committees meet and suggested having a working lunch so that members could get to know each other and discuss agendas.
Just my apologies. I cannot come.
There are no further items on the agenda. Thank you very much for your forbearance today.
Meeting closed at 12:45.
Previous
Housing Stock Transfer