Official Report 513KB pdf
Item 4 is consideration of a report on the Committee of the Regions. I hand over to Patricia Ferguson.
First, I have an apology, as I have just noticed a mistake in the sixth paragraph of the letter that I sent to the convener. My first COR plenary was in January 2013 and not January 2012. I had mentioned 2012 earlier in the letter; the mistake is just one of those things.
If members want any further information on the on-going discussions, I am happy to either get it for them or provide them with a link to where it is contained.
I was conscious that it took an inordinate amount of time to get my membership of the Committee of the Regions agreed, which seems to be a common problem, at least among the United Kingdom delegation—I am not sure whether it is a problem internationally—but I had not appreciated quite how labyrinthine the whole process is. It is important to learn from someone who has been there before. I hate to think what it would have been like and how I would have struggled if Stewart Maxwell, who is very familiar with the structures, had not already been there. I met some other colleagues along the way who helped, too. It really was difficult. However, I got my head round it quite quickly once I was there. I would not want to put off other colleagues who might want to take on the role in future years, because it is very interesting.
Among the interesting things that are happening is the developing relationship with our colleagues in the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on shared issues and issues where we have a common perspective. That relationship has always been there, but it is fair to say that it is getting better. We now meet regularly and, for example, share information and briefings. We also do that with the Local Government Association, which provides some helpful information, support and background.
The Committee of the Regions has a really big workload and I doubt whether we or any two delegates from a country could know everything that is going on in it, no matter how hard we might try to do so. However, the committee’s documentation is easily accessible to anyone who wants to see it through its web portal. I am happy to provide that information to colleagues if that would be helpful to them, and I encourage colleagues who have an interest in any of the subjects that are coming up to let Stewart Maxwell or me know so that we can reflect on that when we are having the discussions.
It has been a fascinating X number of months on the Committee of the Regions. I am finding it very interesting. Apart from anything else, I learn a huge amount almost every day when I am at a meeting. Some of the smaller meetings are even more interesting than the big plenary sessions, as you might imagine.
I can see from the calendar of events just how diverse and absolutely fascinating the subjects are, so you are absolutely right. You mentioned upcoming issues. Is there any way in which—this might be completely insurmountable—we could have a forward plan of the issues that are coming up so that we could look at that information before the committee meets rather than responding to any issues afterwards?
Absolutely. I think that all the commissions have forward work plans—the ones that I am involved in certainly do—so we tend to know in advance roughly what issues are coming up. I will check and, if I can provide that information, I will pass it on to the clerks.
I was pleased to hear about the better working relationship with COSLA. A few weeks ago, as convener, I met David O’Neill, the COSLA president, who is seeking a much closer working relationship with this committee as well as the work that it is doing in the Committee of the Regions. There is a realisation that, if we have many heads in and about the structures in, as you put it, the labyrinth of Europe, that can only help us. We are doing a bit of work on how we can work a bit closer with COSLA and David O’Neill in particular. I look forward to that happening.
Has the broadband agenda been discussed? I see that the topic was on the agenda for the July plenary. At several previous meetings of our committee, Jamie McGrigor and I have raised the big cut—I think that it is a cut from €9 billion to €1 billion—to the information technology infrastructure fund that provides support throughout Europe. Is the Committee of the Regions aware of the issue of the deployment of broadband? Has it developed a view on how it might assist in the face of such a huge cut?
10:45
I will look back at the papers and provide the final opinion. I do not recall discussing the issue that you mention, perhaps because the €9 billion budget was a proposal rather than money that was actually there. We might have discussed the actual rather than the proposed budget, if you see what I mean, but in any case, I think that our discussion was more about how we might cut costs through simplifying things. As I said, however, I will certainly provide you with the opinion for your interest.
Super.
I recall a conversation in which I suggested that we get the person who the Scottish Government is employing to assist in this process to look into other funding streams or funding in kind. Have we taken any steps towards identifying that person and seeing whether they can assist us—or is that a “Not yet”? I think that it is a “Not yet”, isn’t it?
It is a “Not yet”.
Well, can we do that, please? Is this our last meeting before the recess?
Yes.
And when is our first meeting after the recess?
We will meet on 9 January to discuss our work programme, so we can have a conversation then about how we take forward inquiries about structural funds.
That would be helpful.
As members have no further questions, I thank Patricia Ferguson for giving us a really good insight into the Committee of the Regions. It is helpful that, for the time being anyway, a member of this committee is a member of that committee. A wee forward plan would certainly give us some ideas about where we go on the matter.
Previous
Scottish Government UpdatesNext
“Brussels Bulletin”