Official Report 140KB pdf
The next item on the agenda is consideration of correspondence, which is listed in the briefing paper.
The list mentions quite a few interesting letters that we can ask for copies of, although I wonder whether some of them should not be circulated anyway. In particular, I note COSLA's invitation to comment on two important consultation papers. Although the deadline is tight, the disability group could comment on the first paper. However, it would be appropriate for the committee to comment on the Scottish Homes race equality policy paper, as that will fit in with the committee's discussion of positive action in housing at our next meeting. I know that COSLA has done a lot of work on that issue, so we should ask that organisation to spend some time addressing it.
Are you suggesting that the disability group should consider the disability rights task force report?
No. It might be able to comment on the report, but it probably does not have the time.
Although the report is on the group's agenda, we cannot do anything within the time scale.
That is a good question. I am actually very pleased that COSLA is asking us to consider the papers, as that is part of the committee's role.
Martin Verity has just advised me that we have not been invited to comment on the papers. COSLA has merely sent them for our information, although I suppose we could comment on them if we want.
Are we commenting on COSLA's response?
The letter was sent to COSLA's equal opportunities members' network and to its equal opportunities officers' network.
So the letter is more for our information.
Yes. The letter was not addressed to the committee as such; however, it provides an opportunity for comment if members wish to do that.
If members wish to read the letter, they can.
That raises an interesting point. The letter has told us indirectly about a deadline on the Scottish Homes race equality policy, which probably means that our antennae need to become a bit more sensitive. The Scottish Homes race equality policy paper is obviously an important document and it is entirely appropriate that the committee comments on it.
Does Malcolm Chisholm want the subgroups to consider the papers in order to generate comments?
I did not say that; however, it seems only reasonable to do so, if the time scale allows it.
We will put the matter on the agenda for the next meeting of the race group.
I should say that it wastes paper to send out all the correspondence to all committee members. Members can get copies of any of the letters from the clerks.
As members are aware, we must keep an eye on everything. Although I know that we cannot do everything simultaneously, we should examine the CRE response to Henry McLeish's announcement on the enterprise network review, which is the second item on the list of correspondence. There has been much activity over that issue—the committees and the Executive are examining it and there will be a debate next week on the subject—and we should investigate how equality considerations have been built into the enterprise network. A few weeks ago, some committee members attended a CRE presentation on the subject and that organisation is extremely dissatisfied with the race equality element. Although we probably cannot do anything about the issue before the summer recess, we should address it at some point. One could argue that, with all the activity surrounding the subject, we should be doing so now. The problem illustrates the massive agenda that the committee faces.
We shall now move into private session for the next item.
Meeting continued in private until 11:02.
Previous
Reporters