Official Report 198KB pdf
The next item is the draft paper on the proposal for us to meet outwith Edinburgh. As members can see, it is proposed that we meet somewhere in the Borders two or three months from now, which will give us a chance to advertise the fact that we are coming to the Borders. If this paper is agreed by the committee, it will be referred to the conveners liaison group for its approval. We will then seek the approval of the Parliamentary Bureau for a meeting to be held outwith Edinburgh. Are there any comments on the paper?
I would be delighted for the committee to meet in the Borders. I know that there are already 10,000 signatures on the petition for a Borders rail link. That is clear evidence of the public demand.
We could certainly mention in the paper the fact that there are 10,000 signatures on the petition to which Christine Grahame refers. Do we agree to pass on the paper to the conveners liaison group and request its support?
Next we have a draft paper on the procedures allowing this committee to initiate a debate in the Scottish Parliament, through liaison with the bureau. That may raise the hackles of conveners of other committees.
It may get up their noses.
Again, it is suggested that we take this paper to the conveners liaison group, to see what other committees think about this committee's ability to initiate debates in the Parliament without going through other committees, and whether they would support the establishment of a mechanism for that.
For clarification, are we talking about initiating debates during normal business, rather than as members' debates?
If the committee decided that a petition that it had received was of sufficient importance to be debated by Parliament, rather than by a committee, I would lodge a motion in the name of the Public Petitions Committee. We would then negotiate with the bureau about when the debate could be held. The bureau may take the view that any debate secured by this committee should be at the expense of debates relating to other committees that had been timetabled in Parliament. That is why it is important to get the other committees on side before we pursue this. They may object to this committee taking up parliamentary time that they regard as their own.
Are you a sweet talker?
I go along with whatever the other conveners suggest, so they can go along with what I suggest. I think that the way forward is to take this proposal to the conveners liaison group for comment and to seek its support for the paper to go forward to the bureau. Is that agreed?
Previous
ProgressNext
Convener's Report