Equal Opportunities Committee, 15 Feb 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 15, 2000

Official Report 296KB pdf

---

Work Programme

The paper on our work programme outlines some of the issues and outstanding business that need to be dealt with in the next couple of months.

Martin Verity and I met the conveners and clerks of the Local Government Committee and the Education, Culture and Sport Committee to discuss how to take evidence on the ethical standards in public life bill. The Local Government Committee is the lead committee. We felt that it would be better not to duplicate the taking of evidence. Annexe A suggests how the evidence might be split up. Does anyone have any comments?

Under the current timetable, are the meetings listed just proposed dates or have they been arranged?

All the meetings have been arranged in line with our usual timetable.

The business for the meetings on 29 February and 14 March is substantial. We need to track legislation. Should not we be getting into the transport bill by the meeting on 28 March? The bill has now been published.

My understanding is that the transport bill is likely to be introduced after the Easter recess, but before the summer recess.

We will clarify that point and deal with any problems that arise. You look puzzled, Malcolm.

I thought that there was a draft bill.

That is just wishful thinking.

Was that just a general statement that was made last week? We know what is in the bill, do we not?

I am sorry. I was talking about the bill itself.

Is there consultation at the moment on the draft bill?

I presume that there will be.

We will find out.

Is everybody happy with what has been agreed on taking evidence on the ethical standards bill? To fit in with the time scale, it may be necessary for us to have an extra meeting and to try to take all the evidence in one day, although obviously we will not meet for a full day. That will probably mean having a meeting on a Monday. I know that people are not particularly keen on doing that, but it will be a one-off, as we have important representations to make on the bill.

It has also been pointed out that we should not make representations only on section 28. The rest of the bill may have implications for equal opportunities, which we will want to consider. Are we agreed that the clerk should set a date to take all the evidence in one day?

Members indicated agreement.

Other outstanding business includes Caledonian MacBrayne. After Achievement Bute's evidence today, I think that everybody will agree that we want to hear from Caledonian MacBrayne.

Will the committee raise issues other than disability with Caledonian MacBrayne?

Any equality issue may be raised with Caledoninan MacBrayne, but I am not aware of any others. If you are aware of any, we can question the company on them.

There is an issue about equality of service from island to island. Would that be our business?

That is not an equal opportunities issue. We can ask questions on issues that are within our remit, but it would be more appropriate to raise issues relating to the service with the Transport and the Environment Committee.

Will we have any input into the consultation that Jack McConnell announced on appointments to public bodies? Would not we want to welcome the fact that the Executive has made it clear that it wants more diversity in public bodies, which fits in with the representations that we have taken? Will we have an opportunity to consider the document and respond to the questions that it raises?

To an extent, we have already taken evidence on the issue, as it has been raised with us. The committee may want to consider the document. I can send a letter to Jack McConnell on behalf of the committee making any suggestions. If people have a look at the document and get in touch with me, I am happy to draft a letter for consideration at the next committee meeting. Is that all right, Johann?

Yes.

The Finance Committee has suggested that we may want to have a role in overseeing stage 1 of the Executive's spending proposals, with a view to reporting on the implications for equal opportunities. Are there any questions or comments? Is it something that the committee wants to do?

We probably should. Many of the things that we discuss have financial implications.

Are we agreed then?

Members indicated agreement.

Point 3.4 of the paper outlines the timetable for other legislation that is likely to be introduced.

I presume that the committee wants to examine that.

Is it official that we will not address the issue of housing until after the summer recess?

I do not know. We will have to ask Martin Verity.

I understand that the Executive will seek to produce a draft consultative bill in the middle of the year. That implies that we should not expect the bill to appear until after the summer recess.

That raises a general question that has arisen in relation to the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Bill. The committee should get involved with bills at the draft stage—that way we are more likely to influence the bill. We could not do that for the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Bill because we were busy with other issues, such as the Macpherson report.

The committee must decide whether to be involved at that stage. However, as we are busy with other matters, it is difficult to catch up. It would be easier if we had more time to consider the issues before feeding in to the lead committee. Our time scale is rather short.

Committee members might want to consider whether we should feed in at the consultation stage. It is difficult to imagine how we could do that, given the business that lies ahead of us over the next couple of months and the fact that we are stuck with timetables that have already been set. We should, however, try to find out if we could do it. We have discussed many times the way in which we are going to feed into the process and there seems to be no ideal method. This committee could consider all legislation—although we are not asked to consider it all—which makes the problem more complicated. Perhaps we can discuss the matter at a future meeting.

Is everybody happy with the report on the committee's forward work programme?

Members indicated agreement.