Official Report 296KB pdf
We agreed to take item 7, on the consultation by the conveners group on timetabling committee meetings at the same time as meetings of the Parliament, in public. A paper in my name has been distributed to members. It was put together on the basis of committee discussions on previous papers and takes on board the idea that, in certain circumstances, committee meetings should be able to take place while meetings of the Parliament are in progress. However, it takes a fairly conservative—if I may use that word—view on the matter. Do members have any comments on the paper?
I know that, in this fledgling democracy of ours, there is a big gap between theory and practice. However, given that Parliament is supposed to conduct informed debate, through which MSPs take decisions on the laws that are to be implemented, I have to go on record as saying that, as a matter of principle, I do not think that there should be committee meetings during meetings of the Parliament. That does not mean to say that there should not be committee meetings—at lunch times or in the evening—on days on which Parliament is meeting.
That is more or less what I was saying, although I was trying to be a wee bit broadminded on the subject.
A definite distinction can be drawn between meetings that coincide with meetings of the Parliament and meetings that might coincide with members' business debates. As votes are not taken on members' business debates, a lot of members do not attend those debates. The potential exists therefore, where necessary, for meetings to coincide with members' business debates, but that should not be done in anything other than exceptional circumstances. I would be reluctant to agree to regular meeting slots on Wednesday evenings or on Thursday lunch times. The Scottish Parliament does not give a lot of time for cross-party groups to meet or for lobbying organisations to meet MSPs.
That is what I am trying to say in the paper.
I am concerned about the notion that evening or lunch time meetings might be scheduled as a matter of course. For all MSPs, lunch time tends not to be lunch time; it tends to be other meeting time. For those of us who have care commitments, including child-care commitments, regular evening meetings would not necessarily be appropriate. There is also a danger that meetings will always expand to fill any available time and that if the opportunity exists, it will become a matter of routine rather than the exception. We should exercise a great deal of caution about meeting at the same time as the Parliament.
I do not agree that committee meetings should be held when the Parliament is meeting, but there might be an argument for having committee meetings in the evening, possibly from 6 pm until 7 pm. I accept Cathy Jamieson's point that that might lead to its becoming a matter of routine. I am not advocating that option, but it would have been useful for us to be able to convene a meeting now, in the midst of the foot-and-mouth crisis, to take evidence from one witness, such as Mr Gardner. Had we had that facility, we might have been able to convene an evening meeting on Wednesdays at fairly short notice.
In the paper, I suggested that in exceptional circumstances a 5.30 pm to 6.30 pm time slot was a possibility. Anything beyond that time is unacceptable. That time slot was based on this committee's experience of a year ago when, on a fairly short time scale, we were dealing with the National Parks (Scotland) Bill. We convened one evening meeting but, because of a problem with the sound system in the Parliament and a run over for other reasons, we ended up sitting quietly in this committee room until after 6 pm before our meeting could start.
If we had evening meetings, can I take it that Parliament staff would receive overtime payments? If we do not know the answer to that question, could we have the matter clarified?
I do not think that it is a case simply of staff getting overtime payments, but of staff getting enough notice so that they can make the arrangements they need to make. Staff also have care responsibilities.
The paper that I put together essentially results in a suggestion that we might be more flexible, but that we do not make any radical change to the current programme. The suggestion takes into account our experience of the first two years of the Parliament and of where we have experienced pressure to do things and been unable to do them.
I have a question of clarification. Paragraph 3 of the paper suggests that in exceptional circumstances we agree that a committee should be allowed to meet when the Parliament is meeting. The convener has said that that will be from 5.30 pm to 6.30 pm, after members' business debates, but the Parliament would not be meeting at that time unless a members' business debate had been extended to 6.45 pm. Why can we not have a principle that committees do not meet when Parliament meets?
It is for discussion.
Like Cathy Jamieson, I do not think that evening meetings should be a matter of course. They are fine in exceptional circumstance and with a good bit of notice, but I am concerned that exceptional circumstances can often become the norm.
Yes, we could probably make that clear.
We should not get too bogged down in this. We should agree that in exceptional circumstances—we are a grown-up committee and can tell when circumstances are exceptional—we can meet in the evenings or lunch times on days when Parliament meets. If we found that we were doing it regularly, we could put a stop to it because it is our decision.
We have been trying to put a stop to weekly meetings for a long time and we are still meeting weekly.
We came close for a while.
Will I ask Richard [Laughter.]—Richard Davies, not Richard Lochhead, who was worried for a moment—to go through the paper to ensure that the views that are expressed in it reflect the views of the committee, especially Richard Lochhead's comment about still disapproving of committees meeting at the same time as the Parliament but having the flexibility, in exceptional circumstances, to meet at lunch time and immediately after Parliament rises?
Meeting continued in private until 17:15.
Previous
Subordinate Legislation