Finance Committee, 13 Jan 2009

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Official Report 126KB pdf

---

Climate Change (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Item 2 is to consider our approach to scrutiny of the financial memorandum to the Climate Change (Scotland) Bill. Members will see from the clerk's paper that level 3 scrutiny is proposed, which means that we will take oral evidence from bodies that will be affected and from the Scottish Government's bill team, after which we will produce a report for the lead committee.

Do members have any comments on the proposed list of witnesses, which can be found in paragraph 27 of the paper? Do you have views on whether to invite the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities or a couple of individual local authorities to give evidence?

It is important to get a broader range of representation on the local government issues. I do not think that inviting COSLA precludes us from inviting individual local authorities.

It is important to cast the net as wide as possible, particularly in seeking written evidence. I suggest that, in addition to the organisations that are suggested in the paper, we make a point of asking all the business organisations for their comments. I expect that the Scottish Retail Consortium will have comments about the power in the bill that would allow ministers to introduce a carrier-bag charging scheme. I appreciate that that is a relatively minor part of what is a substantial bill, but it would be appropriate to ask the Scottish Retail Consortium to comment on it in written evidence.

You have pre-empted me; I was going to ask about written evidence after this. Is the proposed list of witnesses acceptable?

Can I make another suggestion? I am not hard and fast about this; I merely pose the question. At the moment, the official adviser to the Scottish Government on climate change is the United Kingdom Committee on Climate Change, which I presume has done a lot of work on many of the provisions in the bill, including some costing work. If that committee has not already submitted written evidence to us, would it be appropriate to invite it to do so rather than invite it to come up here and give oral evidence? It would seem sensible at least to solicit that committee's views—if it has any—on the provisions in the bill and the potential costs.

It is the committee's task to look at the bodies on which the costs will fall, but I am sure that we could ask the clerks or the Scottish Parliament information centre to get information from the Committee on Climate Change, which would help us in our inquiries.

There could be a cost to that committee, too, if there were a change in the arrangements.

Yes, but we are really looking at bodies in Scotland. I think that what I have suggested will meet your request and will help us in getting extra evidence.

Are we going to invite COSLA and individual authorities, or shall we invite COSLA alone?

We should invite COSLA and individual authorities.

Which local authorities should we invite? Should they be a rural authority and an urban authority, or do we want the clerks to provide suggestions if members have none?

If the clerks could do that, it would be immensely helpful.

The second question, which addresses Derek Brownlee's point, is whether we wish to seek additional written evidence from all local authorities or other business representative bodies. The Scottish Retail Consortium has been suggested. Do we want to take evidence from all local authorities, or are we content not to do so?

All local authorities.

That should give us plenty of reading material. What about other business representative bodies? We have had one suggestion. Is that adequate?

One aspect of the bill that is receiving quite a lot of notice is forest land.

Whom do you have in mind?

I wonder whether the clerks could assist us by finding out whether there are representative bodies from the private sector, rather than the public sector, that may want to contribute.

It would be helpful if the clerks could take a look at that, and we will take that on board. That is much appreciated. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

It simply remains for me to close the meeting.

Can I just check the timescale for pulling all this together? Parliament is keen for the Climate Change (Scotland) Bill to proceed as quickly as possible and many people are frustrated about how long it has taken already.

The clerk may wish to help in this situation.

Whenever the committee considers a financial memorandum, the aim is to report to the lead committee within the timetable that is agreed through the office of the Minister for Parliamentary Business and the Parliament itself. If a timetable has been agreed for stage 1 consideration of the bill by the lead committee, the Finance Committee will fit in with that.

Okay—that is fine.

Meeting closed at 14:48.