Official Report 198KB pdf
Borders (Education Budget) (PE402)
Item 6 on the agenda is petition PE402, from Ms Augusta Greenlees, on the Scottish Borders Council overspend. Members have the petition in front of them. The Public Petitions Committee considered the petition on 23 October 2001 and agreed to refer it to us, with the request that it be taken into account as part of our Scottish Borders inquiry. Members also have the remit of our inquiry in front of them. I suggest that we include as part of our inquiry the aspects of the petition that are pertinent to the roles and responsibilities of the committee and lie alongside the remit of the inquiry that we have already agreed.
Christine Grahame wanted to make clear that she gave her apologies for the whole afternoon, because she is chairing the Justice 1 Committee. I know that she has a strong interest in this, as I have. The points raised in the petition are being dealt with by the inquiry—those involved witnessed the evidence-taking session this afternoon. I hope that we can return to points that have not been dealt with by the inquiry. If the petitioners think that we have not received full answers, perhaps they could come back to the committee to say that we have not addressed certain points properly. Given what we have heard from witnesses this afternoon, I do not know how we can get full answers.
We can deal only with the points that are within the competency of the Parliament. Issues in the petition about the posts and responsibilities of elected members are outwith the responsibilities of the Parliament. It is for the people of the Scottish Borders to determine whether those people are competent to hold positions of responsibility.
It struck me that, in the remit of the committee and the inquiry, we could address point (c) rather than points (a) and (b), as the responsibility for those lies elsewhere.
Except that in the course of taking evidence, certain germane matters are being raised—as we heard this afternoon—that I am sure those responsible for the petition will note.
We must be careful not to overstep our responsibilities as a committee. We must focus on the responsibility for making recommendations on the matters within our remit. It would damage the integrity of the committee to go beyond that, especially if an external body were to ignore the recommendations.
I disagree that it would damage the integrity of the committee. People expect us to ask questions and get answers. We cannot and should not do certain things, but we would disappoint a lot of people if we did not see our role on issues such as this as being to ask questions that members of the public do not get the chance to ask. I accept that our final report may not be able to encompass certain issues.
We will be able to live with that compromise position.
Our inquiry has brought some openness by taking evidence and asking people to account for themselves. I hope that our inquiry will encompass the aims of the petition in a sense and that comments that are on the record will answer some of the questions that lie behind the petition. It is not for us to take some of the actions that are requested in the petition, but we can explore the issues. By doing that, the Parliament will have filled a gap that would not have been filled before it existed.
The petition strays between the inquiry that we have been conducting and those that Audit Scotland have been conducting. The fitness of councillors in the Borders to hold office is a matter for the people there. The positions that people hold within the council is a matter for the elected councillors in the Borders, who are responsible for the election of office bearers to the council. We are dealing with some aspects and I hope that we will report on those in due course.
Meeting closed at 16:40.
Previous
Subordinate Legislation