Justice Committee

Meeting date: Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Official Report 345KB pdf

---

Work Programme

Item 4 on the agenda is to consider our approach to developing a work programme. I refer members to the note from the clerk, which is paper 3. No specific decisions on future areas of work will be made today, as we need to have a discussion about that, but members are welcome to flag up any ideas. That will allow the clerks and the Scottish Parliament information centre to prepare further information on those topics for full discussion at a later date.

I am happy to hear any ideas that members may have and the clerks will take a note of them. Members can also e-mail the clerks, if they wish—they are clerks to the committee, not clerks to James Kelly and Christine Grahame—with any ideas that they may have, bearing in mind that we may decide to have an away day, when we can hold more detailed discussions. Are there any future inquiry topics that members would like to suggest?

I note what you said, convener, and I agree that we need a more substantive discussion. The note from the clerk is helpful in that regard. However, rather than suggesting a future inquiry topic, I note that a sectarianism bill is due to come before Parliament to be processed before the end of June. The timetable has not been published yet, but we must be aware of the potential for input from this committee. A number of meetings would normally be required to consider a bill of that nature, and I am concerned that the timetable is somewhat truncated. Leaving those concerns aside, we need to flag up the opportunity for input from the committee once we know what the timetable is.

Does anyone else wish to comment on that?

I agree with James Kelly’s comments and concerns. A bill is coming forward, but I am not yet sure of the Government’s intentions with regard to the committee’s role. I acknowledge the Government’s concern to get the bill through as quickly as possible, but we should not necessarily negate the committee’s role without question.

I do not think that it is breaking news to anyone who bothers to listen to the radio that I share members’ concerns on the issue. However, I will reserve my position until I see the bill as introduced. We will know shortly what the timetable is, but it is important that we put our thoughts on the record. If any other member has concerns, they are entitled to say so.

I have very practical concerns. Anticipation of a solution has been raised in the public mind, but the timetable does not seem to offer enough time for committee members fully to consider the ramifications. Without rehearsing all the elements, I wish to note my concern.

The committee has an important scrutiny role and must feed into any legislation. While accepting the tight timescale, I hope that that can happen.

I reiterate what other members have said. This is a complex area of legislation, and I am very concerned that it looks as if the bill will be pushed ahead without any pre-legislative inquiry. The committee’s role ought to be recognised.

We have put that issue on the record, and we can return to it.

Members have not come up with any inquiry ideas—that is fine, because we can deal with such ideas when we hold a business planning day, which is the next item for us to discuss. Previous members have found such a day to be very useful. The details will be developed by the clerks, the convener and the deputy convener, with regard paid to committee members’ views.

Do members agree in principle that we would like a day on which we sit down and have a real discussion about the types of inquiries that we might want to undertake, and about our modus operandi as a committee?

Members indicated agreement.

I ask members to let the clerks know of their availability so that we can co-ordinate matters. It would be good to hold the planning day in July, but I suspect that members, having had a long campaign and a busy settling-in period, may wish it to be later. It will be held in the Parliament—we are not allowed to leave the building.

On the same tack, members may, once they have fed in their draft ideas, wish SPICe to produce any additional research briefings that would be useful. That would allow us to know whether Audit Scotland was doing something or whether an inquiry was going on somewhere else, for example; otherwise, we might duplicate work or our timing might be wrong. We might also want to follow up previous Justice Committee inquiries.

Members should e-mail their ideas to the clerk, who will produce a briefing paper about what areas might be useful to follow up. The legacy paper might have given members ideas and members might wish to pick up on issues that the previous committee dealt with. I am always banging on about the fact that legacy papers should not gather dust.

We have agreement in principle to the away day—which will take place here—and members will advise clerks of some ideas for research, which will form part of a discussion paper.

Do members wish to invite relevant ministers and the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to the next meeting of the committee, so that we can get a broad outline from the Government of what lies ahead? Members should indicate agreement by speaking rather than nodding; nodding heads do not go on the record.

Members: Yes.

When is the next meeting scheduled?

It is my understanding—although this is not set in stone—that the cabinet secretary and ministers will be available not next week but the week after. If we can have a meeting next week, we will, but it will most likely be in two weeks’ time.

If it is in two weeks’ time, we need to be aware that, if Parliament is considering the sectarianism bill in that final week, we might need to amend our thinking.

Indeed. You have made your point on that issue, as have other members. That is noted.

I have been asked to inquire whether members want to consider having a mini-inquiry at the committee’s first meeting after the recess. Remember, it will be a very focused inquiry, with only one evidence-taking session and perhaps three panels of witnesses, after which we will write a report. If members have any thoughts on a subject that the inquiry could deal with, they should e-mail the clerks over the coming week. We can discuss our choice of issue at our next meeting, by including the matter under item 1 on the agenda.

I have a suggestion. I am not prepared to die in a ditch over it, but I note that the legacy paper refers to the police complaints commissioner for Scotland and the position of that post in the future. That might be an issue that could be dealt with in one day and it might be useful to address it, given that there might well be discussions about the structure and process of policing in the future.

That is simply a suggestion that I offer. If the committee decides not to choose that subject, I will not lose any sleep over it.

You should not undersell.

I prefer to undersell and overdeliver.

Your suggestion is noted. If anyone else wants to suggest similar issues that we could address, they should tell the clerks.

I hope that we are always as efficient as we have been today. As I have already trailed, I expect the next meeting to take place on 28 June.

Meeting closed at 12:13.