Procedures Committee, 21 Feb 2006

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Official Report 129KB pdf

---

Annual Reports

In the past day or so, we have received three e-mails from people who appear to consider our agendas industriously and who have expressed concern that there may no longer be committee annual reports. The e-mails have only just arrived, so they have not been circulated. One of them expresses concern that there has been no consultation, and suggests that the committee should not rush into a decision. The two other e-mails are from people who claim that the annual reports are a key part of how they study how the Parliament works. In my innocence, I had thought that there would not be an issue, but it is clear that to some people there is an issue. We should not rush into a decision.

First, I suggest that we ask the clerks to contact the other committee clerks to find out whether they have any views on how we should best publicise or make accessible to the public the work of the committees. Whereas the committee annual reports are 750 words long, the Parliament's annual report gives each committee 500 words. There does not seem to be a great difference and, in fact, most people get their information from the electronic system.

Secondly, we should contact the people who have written to us, and anyone else who similarly studies our activities—which is rather frightening—and ask them whether they have any helpful suggestions for how we can, in as economic a fashion as possible, best ensure that our activities are open and scrutable. As the matter has been raised by the Conveners Group, we should continue to pursue it, but in a gentle fashion and without rushing into anything.

I agree with that approach. Two of the main issues that have arisen are staff resources and time, and publication costs. However, producing 750 words when 500 words are being produced anyway for the Parliament's annual report does not represent a huge time cost.

I take the point about the production costs of a publication that is not normally purchased. I did not realise that it was effectively in the standing orders that a hard copy had to be produced. A compromise might be that committee annual reports will be produced only on the website, and not in paper copy. However, the approach that the convener outlined is satisfactory.

I was hoping to rush into this, but I am persuaded by the convener's very reasonable comments. People are watching what the committee is doing and they are expressing concerns, so we have to take those concerns seriously. As you suggest, convener, we should contact the people who e-mailed us. However, we should not hold a huge inquiry into the issue. What goes on in the Parliament is very accessible to the general public. We should consider, within as tight a timeframe as possible, whether the glossy annual report is wasteful of resources and taxpayers' money.

We were previously told that very few copies were sold, but now more accurate information tells us that the figure seems to have increased a bit. It is still not rivalling Harry Potter, but it is in double figures. I agree with Cathie Craigie that we should not make a mountain out of a molehill, but the matter is worth pursuing gently. Other members might have more constructive ideas as to how we could present ourselves.

I am happy with the procedure. Committee annual reports are quite useful, and I approach the matter from that point of view. What you have outlined is sensible.

We will discuss Crown appointments at our next meeting. The clerks have produced a draft of some suggested wording. To speed the whole thing up, it would be helpful if members could give any comments on it to the clerks by Thursday.

Our next meeting is at 11.30 on Tuesday 7 March. The Scottish Affairs Committee is taking evidence from some of us earlier that day.

What is it taking evidence on?

Sewel motions.

What is a Sewel motion? [Laughter.]

What are they called now?

I think that they are called legislative consent memoranda.

Oh yes, I know what they are.

The Scottish Affairs Committee has studied our report on Sewel motions and is responding from the Westminster end.

There is a time pressure for Labour members because we have a group meeting at 12.30.

We will try to get through the agenda in an hour.

Meeting closed at 11:02.