Item 5 is consideration of correspondence from the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee. Members will see from the clerk's paper that that committee is considering the procedures that should apply to scrutiny of public bills that affect private interests, which are known as hybrid bills. The Finance Committee has been asked for its views, and the paper concentrates on issues that are of particular relevance to our role. I refer members to paragraph 10 and I invite comments on the information on the financial cost of a hybrid bill that should be required by standing orders.
The issue is important. We are developing a new template for the Parliament, which will be used again and again. Most of the issues that are set out in annex A to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee's letter are directly relevant to the Finance Committee. I am quite concerned that we have been asked to respond within a week. Most of the issues require discussion and we might also need to hear from someone from the procedures side of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee or from the private bills unit. We should be wary of rushing decisions on parliamentary procedure that will stand for years to come.
I do not disagree with what Linda Fabiani said about the importance of getting it right, although we could amend the standing orders if details emerged that demonstrated that we had not quite got things right.
Is the general feeling in the committee that we should seek more information? The clerks can produce a paper.
Hybrid bills caused me enormous problems from 1974 to 1979 in Westminster. I see that they have not changed.
You are an expert, then.
Only in the sense that I understand the problems.
We cannot consider any of those issues in isolation. We should have time to scrutinise all the issues.
So you want a paper with more information and further consideration of the issues.
I would like a session to talk through the issues, as there are many questions. For example, other bits of legislation, such as planning legislation, will impinge on the new Forth road crossing. If a decision is made on one issue at the moment, that might impinge on other issues further down the line. We should consider the matter as a whole.
I understand your concerns and agree that we need to be careful. Perhaps the clerk can give us some advice.
The Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee is at the beginning of its inquiry. If members felt that they had questions that required answers, rather than drawing conclusions now, it would be perfectly appropriate to raise those questions. We can put them to that committee and expect it to explore them in its inquiry.
I agree entirely with Linda Fabiani. I have been on two private bill committees, and my experience may be relevant. The members of those committees received legal advice with regards to prejudice and issues that impinged on other areas. The remit of the Finance Committee, which is a statutory committee of the Parliament under the Scotland Act 1998, is much wider than that of a private bill committee. If we are to consider hybrid bills, issues with regards to the areas that members represent or our interests might impinge on that. Therefore, legal advice is required before we form a view. I am open to having as much scrutiny as possible but, having been on two private bill committees, I am aware that there are sensible strictures with regard to activity in such committees. That draws us into territory on which I am not qualified to comment at this stage.
The committee is urging caution and requests more information before we come to a conclusion.
Meeting continued in private until 16:04.