Environment and Rural Development Committee, 10 Sep 2003
Meeting date: Wednesday, September 10, 2003
Official Report
304KB pdf
Work Programme
Item 4 on the agenda is the committee's work programme. Members have in front of them a paper that we have discussed, which covers several issues that we considered informally at our away day. Those issues are now being brought back formally to the committee for agreement.
I invite members to note the likely time frames for undertaking work on the draft Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill, the national waste plan and scrutiny of the draft Scottish Executive budget. We must decide whether the committee should take up the invitation of Scottish Natural Heritage to visit sites of special scientific interest as part of its consideration of the draft Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill. We must also decide whether we want to seek an informal briefing from Scottish Executive officials before we move to formal stage 1 scrutiny of the bill.
Do I have broad agreement on those matters?
Members indicated agreement.
That means that we will seek an informal briefing on the bill and attempt to visit an SSSI.
We have also received an invitation from the Scottish Gamekeepers Association to visit a site to examine management of such sites. We will try to make arrangements that suit all of us. I ask members to e-mail their preference to the clerks by the end of tomorrow. I imagine that that will be difficult, but if members do that, we will try to agree something.
I ask members to note the time commitments that are likely to arise from the referral of other business, such as subordinate legislation and petitions. We need to agree how to handle petitions and ensure that we consider them properly. I invite members to agree to receive an update on petitions at regular intervals—I suggest every two months—rather than ad hoc; to incorporate consideration of petitions into other work items, such as legislation, where possible; and to appoint reporters to investigate and report to the committee on important matters that petitions raise. Do we agree to that?
Members indicated agreement.
On European matters, I propose that we ask the Executive to send relevant pre-council and post-council reports direct to the committee and that we authorise me and the clerks to request further detailed briefings as required on any dossiers of particular interest. I suggest that we ask the Minister for Environment and Rural Development to send the relevant chapter of his six-monthly briefing to the European and External Relations Committee direct to our committee and that we seek a standing agreement that the minister be invited to give oral evidence to the committee towards the start of each six-month presidency—I would like to start with the next presidency, which is with Ireland for the first half of 2004. That procedure will continue for as long as the EU operates in that way.
The committee is also invited to authorise the convener and clerks to receive at regular intervals spreadsheets setting out details of transposition arrangements, to allow us to track the progress of legislation and to update the committee as required.
If the minister gives a presentation at the start of each six-month presidency to the European and External Relations Committee, would it save his time to make a joint presentation to us and that committee, if he planned to say the same things to us?
I understand from my membership of what was the European Committee that the minister with overall responsibility for European matters speaks to the committee and that that minister is asked many questions on specific subjects that members cannot answer. The aim is to avoid total overlap.
The committee is also asked to note that members will be issued with the sift paper of relevant documents that is compiled by the European and External Relations Committee and copied to each subject committee. The purpose of that is to avoid overlap and to ensure that we take our responsibilities seriously. Finally, I would be grateful if the committee authorised me to consider any relevant European issues and to produce a regular report to the committee—every three months or so—as part of the committee's work programme, to monitor the issues effectively. Is that agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
I ask you to review in your first report the effects of the decisions on agriculture and husbandry in Europe that are made in the World Trade Organisation's conference this week.
We can ask the minister about the status of that in the European Union.
We must tie up the remaining legacy items from predecessor committees, which we discussed soon after we were appointed to the committee. I recommend that we bid for committee time in the chamber to debate the findings of the Rural Development Committee's report on integrated rural development. I also suggest that we continue to explore issues relating to the Scottish fishing and forestry industries as they arise. This morning's debate has given us more matters to which we will want to return.
I recommend that we not pursue three issues—petition PE377, on polluting activities in built-up areas; planning procedures for telecommunications developments; and Highlands and Islands ferry contracts—as they now fall within the remit of other committees.
What did petition PE377 relate to?
It concerned the Carntyne incinerator.