Scotland Bill Committee
Meeting date: Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Official Report
533KB pdf
Correspondence
The final item on our agenda is correspondence from Fiona Hyslop. Members will remember that it is in response to questions that were asked when she made her original statement. First, there was a question from Pauline McNeill about whether the chief economic adviser would give us evidence, which has now happened. Secondly, there was a request from me about the willingness of Scottish Government officials to provide advice to the committee on technical matters—some of which we have touched on today—such as modelling various approaches to grant reduction and the various other income tax proposals that have been made.
The deputy convener has suggested to me that the way to approach that is to reiterate some of the issues in our questioning of Scottish Government ministers next week, and then to take a couple of minutes at the end of the meeting next week to decide whether we feel that the assurances that we are looking for have been given. If they have not, we could write, at that stage. The discussion would take five minutes at the end of our meeting next week, when I intend in any case to discuss the work programme.
I see that Peter Peacock is preparing to leave. By 1 o’clock, I hate being in a committee meeting, so I just want to say to members—this might as well be on the record—that we have ministers before us next week and the intention is to meet earlier than our usual 2.30 slot on a Tuesday, in order to accommodate John Swinney’s and Fiona Hyslop’s attending Cabinet. Following that evidence session, we will have a private session to identify any follow-up information that we need and also to discuss our work programme, because I have asked the clerks to prepare a work programme that will ensure that we cover everything, including any responses to the calls for evidence, by the time we go into recess in February. That will allow us, in the period after recess, to look at the terms of our report. If our advisers have been approved, they could be part of that discussion. It looks as though the committee will meet in private from 1 o’clock, in public from 1.30 until about 3.30, and then in private again from 3.30 to 4.15 to discuss our future work programme, to have a formal introduction to our advisers and to identify any information that we want to request formally from the Governments. Does that make sense as a way to proceed?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you very much. I will see you next week.
Meeting closed at 13:05.