Official Report 382KB pdf
Welcome to the 13th meeting in 2013 of the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee. Members and the public should turn off mobile phones, BlackBerrys and so on as leaving them in flight mode or on silent will affect the broadcasting system. We have received apologies from Claudia Beamish; we wish her well and welcome her substitute, Claire Baker, to this morning’s meeting.
The first item is for the committee to decide whether to take agenda item 5, which is consideration of the work programme, in private. Are we agreed?
No.
Do you wish to say something about that, Jayne?
Having studied the work programme, I genuinely cannot think of any reason why we should not discuss it in public. It is simply a list of topics. We will not be discussing those topics or the surrounding issues in any detail; we will simply be agreeing the list, and I see nothing in it that is sensitive or which needs to be discussed in private. Because I cannot think of any reason to justify our taking the item in private, I think that we should do it in public.
Do other members have any comments?
Although I entirely understand where Jayne Baxter is coming from, I might want to say certain things in private during a work programme discussion that I would not wish to say on the record. I think, therefore, that we should stick with the tradition of holding work programme discussions in private.
Although I understand Jayne Baxter’s view, I endorse Alex Fergusson’s comments. I have to say that, over the past two years, I have found it extremely helpful to discuss the work programme in private because it allows the Scottish Parliament information centre representative and the clerks to participate in the process. Because I find that input extremely valuable, I concur with Alex Fergusson.
I support Jayne Baxter. On those occasions when the work programme is more undefined than what we have before us, there might be a case for taking the discussion in private. Today, however, we seem to be agreeing a list of topics that has previously been discussed by the committee. As a result, I think that we should take the discussion in public.
Given that all the committees on which I have served have taken items on the work programme in private, I concur with Alex Fergusson and Graeme Dey. I have to say that it is a bit presumptuous to assume that members will not want to ask questions and I therefore support the view that the work programme should be discussed in private.
Arguments have been advanced on both sides. Jayne, are you convinced that the majority of the committee do not agree with your position?
Apparently so, but I maintain my position and ask that the work programme be considered in public.
Then we will move to a vote on taking item 5 in public.
For
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Against
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
There are two members in favour and seven against, so we will take the item in private as usual.
Previous
Attendance