Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 13 Sep 2000

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 13, 2000

Official Report 158KB pdf

---

Items in Private

Good morning, everybody. Item 1 on the agenda is a discussion on whether to take items 2 and 3 in private.

Any committee of the Parliament has to be careful about decisions to meet in private. The criteria for that, which have been discussed by the Parliamentary Bureau on a number of occasions and communicated to committee conveners, were set largely as a result of The Scotsman case last year in relation to the lobbygate inquiry in which Karen Gillon played such an outstanding part.

Committees must show that it would prejudice their work not to take an item in private. Item 3, on the draft report of the special educational needs inquiry, falls into that category, as holding that item in public would essentially be publishing the report before it was finished.

Item 2 is more questionable. Committees have tended to accept that items should be discussed in private when they relate to the lines of questioning to take with witnesses. However, I am not aware of any committee having discussed in private the composition of an inquiry or the people who would be called to that inquiry. Indeed, some of that material is already in the public domain. The instructions on that—which are voluntary and which committees can change—would question whether item 2 should be taken in private.

We are all aware of the immense public interest in the inquiry. The vast bulk of the committee's work on the matter must be in the Official Report—that will be important to people who are considering how we do our work. Canon Kenyon Wright, in the letter that has been circulated to us by e-mail, lays an additional burden on the committee. He makes the important point that the consultative steering group is expecting from the committee what it believes will be one of the most important moments of the Parliament.

Given those circumstances, convener, we should not take item 2 in private. If we reach the stage in item 2 of discussing lines of questioning—although I am not sure that we can do that today, as we have not seen any written evidence—I understand that we could move a motion at that moment. However, I will formally propose that we do not take item 2 in private.

As the agenda has been published, it would be appropriate to adjourn for five minutes so that broadcasting can make it clear to the Parliament that the item will be held in public. It may be that no one chooses to watch the committee, but we must not only be open, but be seen to be open. That is the right way to proceed this morning.

I do not have a problem with that, unless anybody else does. However, I would suggest one proviso, which concerns the last page of the paper that has been circulated by the clerk, on advisers. Can we agree to take that part in private? I am happy to take the remainder in public.

That is first rate.

In principle, I agree with the proposal. However, when we are discussing witnesses, I would like to be able to say some things in private about individuals.

We could discuss the advisers in private and at the end have a round-up of any information about witnesses that members were concerned about divulging in public. However, the clerk will confirm that we are covered in committee by a form of privilege when speaking about individuals.

That is my understanding.

The point that I was making was more about discretion. I would be happy to have a round-up of the sort that Mike Russell has suggested.

From my council background, I understand that items should always be taken in public unless there is a compelling and persuasive reason not to do so. The presumption should always be that meetings are held in public.

I am happy for us to take item 2 in public.

I should indicate to members that the agenda of this week's meeting does not include an update on items of on-going business, such as Hampden. That will be included on the agenda for a meeting next week, when we will try to deal with any outstanding issues so as to clear the decks for the inquiry.

Item 2 is the school exam results inquiry. I have received a letter from Brian Monteith that I would like to return to during the discussion of this item.

I suggested that we pause for a moment to allow broadcasting and others to make the necessary arrangements.

We will take a short break.

Meeting adjourned.

On resuming—