Good morning. I welcome everyone to the 24th meeting of the Justice 2 Committee. We dealt with item 1 in private, for the purpose of agreeing our lines of questioning for item 3. I ask members to do the usual stuff and switch off their mobile phones and anything else that makes a noise and might disturb the committee. I have received apologies from Duncan Hamilton.
Are we of the view that consideration of the report is likely to lead to sufficient disagreement or be sufficiently controversial to justify being conducted in private? I am mindful of comments that are being made. It must be a balanced decision.
We normally discuss committee reports in private.
I agree. My question is a mild challenge to the norm.
At the conveners liaison group, I put on record my feeling that we do almost everything else in public. We have a good record of debating our points in public.
We do.
We meet in private only for a small number of reasons—when we are discussing a report or lines of questioning—and I propose that we do not depart from that unless the committee is otherwise minded.
That would be my view. It is preferable that as many matters as possible are aired in public. However, there is a danger that proper discussion of a report of this nature would be inhibited if it were held in public, which could inhibit our ability to produce a balanced report.
I agree with that.
So, are we agreed that we will take the item in private?
Thank you. I also ask members to agree that draft reports should be dealt with in private at future meetings, notwithstanding what Stewart Stevenson has said. Is that agreed?