Standards and Public Appointments Committee, 19 Dec 2006

Meeting date: Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Official Report 98KB pdf

---

Members' Interests

We now move to item 2, which is effectively in two parts. We are being asked, first, to finalise the draft determinations that spring from the Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Act 2006 and, secondly, to approve four draft reports to the Parliament, one for each determination.

We issued a consultation document on 24 November. We have received no responses, so the recommendation to the Parliament lies with us. Three of the determinations were reasonably straightforward, but the written statement looks slightly more daunting due to its size. We have not reached a final decision. We put out for consultation what we were minded to do. No views have been expressed by others. We now have the responsibility to decide the information that we should leave out of and put into the statement.

Members may have noticed that there have been a few minor technical changes in the drafts. If members want to go through them, we can do so, but I assume that they are content with them.

Members indicated agreement.

Do members have any comments on the reports or the determinations?

No.

Then I will draw members' attention to pages 2 and 3 of document ST/S2/06/12/2. You will note that action is required on the following headings: "Election Expenses", "Sponsorship", "Gifts", "Overseas Visits", and "Interests in Shares".

We sought views on whether it would be appropriate to request a donor's principal business address and nature of business. We need to make a decision on that. Having seen it summarised in the document, I was struck that it might be appropriate to require the nature of the business each time it is mentioned and to ask for the principal business address, to provide consistency—it does not appear under "Sponsorship" or "Overseas Visits" at the moment.

Do members have a view on that?

I think that that is sensible, for consistency. When I read the document, I felt that the requirement made sense.

I agree with Linda Fabiani and the convener that we need consistency. Other than that, the documents seem fine to me.

Are members content to include all of the above matters with the adjustments that we have agreed in the written statement and to agree the draft reports to go to the Parliament?

Members indicated agreement.

When will they go?

We hope that they will go early in the new year. You will note that the procedure for determinations is up for decision by the Parliament on Thursday afternoon. Assuming Parliament agrees with our proposals, the intention is that we will publish them on Friday and they will go the Parliament for debate and decision in January.

Are members content to leave it to the clerks and me to tweak the proposals in light of any decision the Parliament may reach on Thursday, rather than have another meeting of the committee?

Could you define "tweak"?

It depends on what Parliament says.

I mean any minor adjustments based on any decision Parliament makes on Thursday. If there is anything major, we will have to look at it. Are members content with that?

Members indicated agreement.

I think that we have agreed everything. Unless anyone has any other matters to raise, I will draw the meeting to a close.

I hope that everyone will enjoy the mince pies and other goodies at the conclusion of our meeting. I wish you all a merry Christmas and a happy new year, when I will see you back here to finish off our business, which will be to deal with the code of conduct.

Merry Christmas to our officials as well.

To each and every one.

Ho, ho, ho.

Meeting closed at 11:14.