Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, 28 Apr 2009

Meeting date: Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Official Report 89KB pdf

---

Cross-party Groups

The committee's approval is sought for the registration of cross-party groups. Murdo Fraser is here to respond to members' questions on the proposed group on Scottish universities.

I understand that some individual members of the proposed group are members of the same organisation. How will that situation be dealt with in practice, for example when there is a vote?

I have been a member of various cross-party groups during the past eight years and I cannot recall an occasion on which a vote took place, so perhaps the question is largely academic. However, when non-MSP members attend a meeting in a representative capacity, it would be inequitable to allow more than one person from the same organisation to vote on an issue. It would seem sensible to ask Universities Scotland, for example, to nominate a person to vote, instead of allowing several individuals to cast a vote, which might unfairly skew the outcome.

If there are no further questions, are members content to approve the cross-party group on Scottish universities?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you.

Frank McAveety is here to respond to questions on the proposed cross-party group on credit unions.

I put to Mr McAveety the question that I put to Mr Fraser. What happens when individual members are members of the same organisation? Perhaps Murdo Fraser will answer the question for you.

In a much more eloquent fashion, I am happy to respond.

In essence, we will use the criteria that Mr Fraser described. If more than one person from the same organisation is keen to participate and there is to be a vote, we will identify a lead person. However, votes have not been custom and practice in cross-party groups. Given that we will be considering the credit union model, co-operation will be the group's guiding principle.

I should say for the record that I will be an office-bearer of the proposed cross-party group on credit unions and a member of the proposed group on town and city centre development. I am not sure whether those are declarable interests.

If there are no further questions, are members happy to approve the cross-party group on credit unions?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you.

We turn to the proposed cross-party group on town and city centre development. Do members have questions for Marilyn Livingstone, who is to be the group's convener? Perhaps Dave Thompson wants to ask his question.

I will pass on that.

The section in the registration form on the group's purpose is very weighty. Perhaps the final sentence would have been sufficient. Of course, that is a matter for the proposed group.

Those paragraphs were put together by the group to set out our aims and objectives, because our agenda is quite big, and the process was democratic. However, you are right to say that the final sentence explains the group's purpose.

Quite often, the more we write down, the more we restrict ourselves, but that is a matter for the group.

Perhaps it would have been better to put the final sentence at the start of the section. That is a minor point.

According to the registration form, it is proposed that the subscription will be a maximum of £50. Does Marilyn Livingstone envisage that £50 will be charged, or is there scope for the subscription fee to be less?

I think that the charge is intended to cover teas, coffees, sandwiches and so on, given that members of the group will come from quite a distance. I think that there will be one payment per organisation. The fee is intended purely to cover refreshments.

Okay. On the basis of the information on the form and the information that Marilyn Livingstone has given us, are members happy to approve the group?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you.