Skip to main content
Loading…
Chamber and committees

Subordinate Legislation Committee, 19 Jun 2007

Meeting date: Tuesday, June 19, 2007


Contents


Work Programme

The Convener:

We move on to agenda item 4, which is consideration of the committee's approach to developing a work programme. I refer members to the clerk's note and suggest that we consider the work programme at an away day. Members have received copies of the previous committee's legacy paper and of the Executive's response to our predecessor's inquiry into the regulatory framework. A copy of the full inquiry report is in members' briefing packs.

Do members have comments on the approach to developing the work programme?

Gil Paterson:

I need to take advice from the clerks about the away day's timing. My view is that it should be earlier—towards the end of August—rather than later, so that I can understand some of the finer points of the committee's work. Rather than getting a handle on the work through doing it, I would feel more comfortable if I knew a bit more about how the committee works, so the away day should be sooner rather than later.

The Convener:

We have one meeting, which will happen next week, before the recess. That will be a proper meeting at which we will get a flavour of our work, but that is all that members will have. I am not averse to Gil Paterson's suggestion of holding the away day early—at the end of the recess, which is the end of August.

Elaine Smith:

An away day is the obvious way forward, particularly when we have new members and a new session of Parliament. Other committees have tended to schedule away days at the end of August.

Who else will be invited to the away day? Will people be invited for sessions on the previous committee's inquiry, for example? I am interested in the make-up of the away day.

I have nothing particular to add. This is all new territory for me.

It is just a matter of fixing dates—arrangements might already have been made—but I presume that we can do that.

The Convener:

Very well. We will leave that to the clerk, who can liaise with members and put something in place.

I imagine that, at the away day, we shall start to consider issues in the legacy paper, which we have touched on, such as the inquiry into the regulatory framework. Although that inquiry was our predecessor committee's property, it might stimulate thought as we go through the weeks, months and years ahead.

The committee's next meeting is on Tuesday 26 June, when we shall consider statutory instruments. Without further ado, I think that I can close the meeting, after which we will discuss informally some of the tasks that lie before us.

Ian McKee:

I have some questions—perhaps I missed something in the papers that were given to me. The legacy paper refers to responses that were awaited in the second parliamentary session and I do not think that I saw them in the paperwork. Did they arrive?

Gillian Baxendine (Clerk):

The Executive's response to the inquiry report came after the legacy paper was finalised. That is the response that was referred to and it is included in members' papers for today's meeting.

Right. I will dig into that.

The Convener:

In sessions gone by, the committee was rather a band of brothers and sisters who worked together. The subject is rather recherché but, in the new session, the committee may play a slightly more central role in the Parliament's work. The committee is good natured and we have an excellent team of members with whom I look forward to working.

Meeting closed at 14:23.