The final agenda item is to consider whether to deal with the draft reports on the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Bill and on the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill in private at our next meeting. I propose that we agree to do that.
The Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Bill has been correctly described as the Executive's main piece of legislation. In our work on the financial memorandum, the bill has been the subject of a great deal of criticism from all sorts of organisations. We should be mature enough to have a discussion about our draft report in public, so that all those who voluntarily submitted evidence to assist us in our efforts will be able to see the arguments that we adduce and the conclusions that we reach in our report on the Executive's flagship policy.
Personally, I object to anything being done in private. I would need people to explain to me why our discussion on the bill in question should be held in private. I do not see anything in the make-up of the bill that might mean that we will damage the economy or cause a terrible blip such that anything major will happen. The bill is a bit of an artificial flagship policy for the Executive. There are more important things in life than antisocial behaviour—believe you me. Why should we discuss the matter in private rather than discuss it openly?
I want to respond to Fergus Ewing's point. Previously in this committee, I have said why I think that draft reports in particular should be discussed in private, but I will reiterate the point. I think that we have far more chance of reaching consensus on a report if we discuss the draft report in private. The evidence-taking sessions have been in public and the report will be published, so there is nothing secretive about having the discussions in private. It avoids the temptation that some people might have to grandstand for the press. We will end up reaching far better decisions and making much better legislation if we have that particular discussion in private. I am not saying that there should be a general rule that we always discuss such items in private. Each case should be taken on its merit. However, with regard to the two pieces of legislation under discussion, I cannot see why we should not have the discussions in private.
I, too, have thought that it is better to consider the cases on their merits and I have voted different ways on different occasions.
In the interests of doing the best possible job and of maintaining the credibility of the Finance Committee and Parliament, it would be useful to take this opportunity to show the Finance Committee being genuinely robust and to demonstrate that we are taking full cognisance of the evidence that all the various groups have submitted. That would prove that the scrutiny and the report generation is robust and that—hopefully—the report will be worth reading.
Anyone who has read the reports on financial memoranda that have been produced by the Finance Committee or has seen the level of inquisition that has taken place during the evidence-taking sessions will be in no doubt that we take the scrutiny process extremely seriously. In the stage 1 reports that have been produced so far, the Finance Committee's reports have often been the key elements that subject committees have highlighted as having been important in relation to their scrutiny of the legislation.
That is not correct. I do not understand why that should be discussed in private, either. I entirely disagree with the arguments that you have advanced.
In that case, I suggest that we vote on my proposal that we deal with the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill and the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Bill in private at—
Should not we vote on the bills individually?
I sought to discover whether you wanted to take them together or separately. Do you want to vote twice, Fergus?
I think that that would be correct. For all I know, Ted Brocklebank might take a different view about the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill: he has not opined on it.
Procedurally, Fergus, you are absolutely correct.
No.
There will be a division.
For
The result of the division is: For 5, Against 4, Abstentions 0. We will discuss the draft report on the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Bill in private.
No.
There will be a division.
For
The result of the division is: For 5, Against 4, Abstentions 0. We will discuss the draft report on the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill in private.
Out of interest, could the clerks provide us with information about how many divisions have taken place in other committees and where this committee stands in relation to other committees in this regard?
I am sure that that can be looked into.
Meeting closed at 12:26.
Previous
Committee Work Practices