Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 13 Feb 2001

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 13, 2001

Official Report 312KB pdf

---

Children's Commissioner

Item 4 on the agenda is to consider whether we need to appoint an adviser on a children's commissioner. I suggest that it would be helpful to have an adviser. If the committee agrees, we will submit that idea to the appropriate bodies for their consent. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

I have received from the clerks a large number of letters from various organisations that have requested to meet the committee. Some of the letters are quite recent, but several have been hanging over since August 2000. I have identified a potential gap in our diary on 13 March. If the committee agrees, we could try to accommodate some invitations on that date, along with an invitation to the grant-aided schools. We will not reopen the debate, but we will discuss some of their concerns. It would help to have that discussion in the committee.

If the committee agrees, I would like to schedule that for 13 March, along with an invitation to the Scottish Rugby Union, whose request to speak to us has been outstanding longest. Historic Scotland and the Scottish Schools Sports Federation also wish to discuss the report on sport in schools, which was published in October. I could suggest to the SRU, Historic Scotland and the Scottish Schools Sports Federation that each has half an hour. The committee could convene at 2 o'clock that day, and see the grant-aided schools at
3.30 pm. If the committee agrees, I will issue the invitations. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

There is continuing concern about the Scottish Qualifications Authority. It would help if we saw its representatives earlier rather than later. We could see them on 27 February or 20 March, where there are gaps in our timetable. Given that the Deputy Minister for Sport and Culture will appear on 27 February, the most suitable date is probably 20 March. We could ask the SQA about some of the decisions that it took last week, the assessment of those decisions and how forward planning for this year's exams is proceeding. It would be useful to have such a session and have it in public. If that is okay, I will issue an invitation to the SQA to come on 20 March.

What about 27 March?

We would be pushing it to see the SQA on 27 March. We have set up the infrastructure and private-public partnerships seminar with Rob Ball for 6 March. It would be wrong to put that off. We have just agreed to see several organisations on 13 March, so there is a gap on 20 March, when we could see the SQA. If issues come up before then, I will return to the committee and ask it to reschedule the meeting earlier, but I think that 20 March may be suitable.

Would it be in order for you, convener, or the clerks to advise the relevant ministers that we will see the grant-aided schools on 16 March to take account of their concerns?

I intend to ask the ministers whether they have a response to the special educational needs inquiry. However, we may not have that information for 16 March, because the report is likely to be discussed in the chamber in April or May. The Executive may not produce a response until then, but I will ask for any information.

I would like to clarify what you said about Allan Wilson not coming today. Am I right in thinking that the motion on the Culture and Recreation Bill will now be discussed in the chamber?

My understanding is that, if the motion is discussed in committee, it need not go to the chamber. However, it might now have to go to the chamber. As I understand it, Mike Russell requested that the committee discuss the issue. If the motion is not debated in committee, it will have to be debated in the chamber. We will have discussions with the minister.

The debate is listed in the business bulletin and has been scheduled for this Thursday for several days.

So the bill will be discussed in the chamber on Thursday. I am sorry that that has happened. I do not know where the misunderstanding arose. It certainly did not come from us.

I do not know whether the minister can dispute his own letter, but it says that the motion

"will not be considered by the Parliament until after the Committee has had an opportunity to consider the Memorandum."

He may be able to go back on that, but that is what the letter says.

I will check that with the minister and raise it with the appropriate parliamentary authorities. I will e-mail members as soon as I have any information.

Did I miss the bit about the adviser on the children's commissioner?

Yes. We agreed that we would have an adviser.

Do we have names?

The conveners liaison group has advised that committees could be subject to equal opportunities legislation because of the way in which we choose advisers, which depends on who knows whom and word of mouth. The group has adopted a new procedure for the appointment of advisers. An open advert will be placed, to allow people to offer themselves as advisers and give a list of their areas of expertise. From that, the Scottish Parliament information centre will draw up a list of several people to present to the committee, without names that would allow gender or racial origin to be identified.

I am not clear about when that procedure will start, but I understand that we must conduct things slightly differently now. I will ask Martin Verity and SPICe to arrange for a list of appropriate names and for adverts to be placed, so that we can get the adviser in place.

Meeting closed at 16:05.