Do members agree that we adopt our standard practice and consider our draft reports on the Sewel convention and on public petitions in private? That would be in accordance with the normal procedure of the committee.
I believe that we should consider draft reports in private. However, given the fact that we have already had our discussion on the matter in public and everybody knows what we are going to do, I wonder what the point would be of doing that on this occasion. However, if you think that taking those items in private would be in the interests of the committee, I can be persuaded. We have had all our discussion in public and the Official Report is there for the reading.
Are you talking about our draft report on the Sewel convention?
I am talking about our reports both on the Sewel convention and on petitions. We have just had our discussion in public, and the papers on the matter are all public. I have noted my concerns about doing it this way in the past. There is some difficulty in then having a private discussion on a report, but we are where we are.
We will still have to make some decisions on the draft report. The principle of having the discussion in private is that the report remains a private report and cannot be subject to the press, for example, saying that the committee has determined X when we have not made a decision on the matter. It is about protecting the report, so that only the final version is published. That is the main reason for dealing with the matter in private.
I am relaxed about the matter. As Karen Gillon says, the main arguments are out there, so it does not make a blind bit of difference.
I agree. I do not see the point in keeping the discussion private, but it is up to the convener.
It is up to the committee. If it were up to me, I would not have to bring the matter to the committee.
This raises some issues. In the past, committees that I have been on have taken in private all the decisions on how a report would be framed. However, it will be impossible for you to mount a leak inquiry should the Sunday Herald or any other newspaper decide to run a story on the Sunday ahead of the report's publication on the Monday, as nobody could say anything other than that the newspaper got the information from the Official Report. Discussing the report in private will not prevent publication ahead of the report, but I understand the point that you are making and, perhaps for the sanctity of the process, I think that we should meet in private.
There are two issues. One is to have items in private so that we can have the discussions in private. The second is to have items in private so that we can clarify that the report accurately mirrors our discussions and we do not have debates like the one that I seem to have been spared most of about the interpretation of particular paragraphs.
You can read it.
I will do. I look forward to doing so.
That is the primary purpose of discussing the report in private. We can agree that the report that is before is and is published is what we think it is.
I cannot envisage anybody storming the barricades to get into the great discussion—I think that it would be a big yawn for many people.
I am sure that it would be. Can we agree to take the items in private?
That concludes today's business.
It is the Finance Committee.
That concludes the meeting. I wish everyone a long and restful recess. We meet again on 13 September.
Meeting closed at 11:58.
Previous
Crown Appointees