European and External Relations Committee, 16 Dec 2003

Meeting date: Tuesday, December 16, 2003

Official Report 312KB pdf

---

Sift

Do committee members have any comments about the sift?

No.

Before closing the meeting, I will respond to Gordon Jackson's comments about the topic for debate. We requested committee time in the chamber to debate the IGC and we have received a provisional offer of a slot on 21 January. Given the turn of events at the weekend—although we could still debate the subject and what happened at the weekend—perhaps we should pick another subject. We might do that by e-mail, but do members feel strongly now about any subjects that we could debate?

I would like to reflect on the matter. The question is a wee bit difficult, because we are trying to guess ahead of Denis MacShane's visit to us on 7 January whether having the debate would be helpful.

One other matter that it would be useful for the committee to consider is the Commission's work programme, which gives us a view of where the Commission is going in the next year. Examining that would be helpful for the committee as the Commission's work programme influences our work programme.

We should not decide now—I take the point that the decision might best be reached by e-mail during the next few weeks. If something is to be debated, perhaps we should debate the Commission's work programme.

As others have said, the work programme has been thrown into disarray. I do not know what advantage there is in discussing it now, because a rethink is called for. However, if, in the interests of democracy and of spreading the work, we are not going to debate the IGC, it would be useful to discuss the proposed constitution as it stands, particularly after Mr MacShane's visit.

When is the deadline for the decision?

We want to give as much advance notice as possible to allow the clerks and other people make preparations. We will also have to agree on a motion. I suggest early January, but I will take guidance from the clerks on that.

I will provide the committee with the exact date, but it would be helpful if the committee agreed in principle to have a debate in the chamber. Time for committee debates in the chamber has become free. I was asked whether the committee would be interested in having a debate and, given members' previous comments, I suggested that the committee might be interested. We would need to be clear on a subject a few days or a week or so in advance. Unless the debate is to be one of those orientation debates, it would have to be on a motion that is agreed by all members of the committee.

How long is the time slot? Is it a three-hour slot?

I do not know. I will have to find out more details. As the slot is on a Wednesday afternoon, it would have to be corralled into the available time, but I am not sure whether it will be for two and a half hours or a smaller share of the time. The outcome will depend on competing bids by committees. If more than one committee comes up with ideas, our debate may be shorter.

Basically, we can defer the decision until the new year.

We should decide that we will take the time that is available, but we do not have to decide what we intend to do with it.

We will consult by e-mail and, I hope, reach a decision at our next meeting.

If we are finished with that point, I have a separate point.

Please be brief.

My point is really a point of order—I discussed it with you privately before the meeting, convener. The point arises from your dual role as convener of the committee and as a party spokesman on fisheries. I do not want to make a meal of the issue, but I want to clarify the need to be explicit about the capacity in which you are expressing a view. For example, you issued a press release either last week or the week before that stated:

"Franz Fischler's vision appears to have been clouded by his desire to kill off Scotland's fishing industry".

You are entitled to that view—although I might not agree with it—but I suggest that, when you express such relatively undiplomatic and non-inclusive views, it is important that you make it clear that you are not expressing the view in your capacity as convener of the committee.

To my understanding, I have never been mislabelled in making utterances on fishing matters. I have never been referred to as convener of the committee in such statements. Are you aware of that happening?

No, but there is a risk that journalists might put two and two together, which might give rise to embarrassments and difficulties elsewhere. I make no complaint about the press release—you are perfectly entitled to those views—but there is an inherent risk in conveners of a committee of the Parliament expressing political views of that nature. We will have to learn as we go along, but I urge you to be careful.

I take your point, but I have been convener since June and the issue has not yet arisen. I hope that you accept that.

I want to raise a separate point. I value the committee's cross-party working and its independence. In that vein, it was a bit discourteous for the committee's views to be used in an Opposition debate without any discussion with committee members beforehand. If we are to continue to work on a cross-party basis and with the independence that the committee has shown in the past, the use of the committee's views in Opposition debates, without discussion with committee members, is not helpful. I want to put that on the record.

I suggest that you write to the Parliamentary Bureau about that issue, because it is not really an issue for the committee.

Can I make a point about what Irene Oldfather said?

A final point. The issue is not on the agenda.

As everything that is said in the committee is in the public domain, any member who wants to use anything that is said in the committee should be able to do so without discussing it with other members. Once a member has made a statement on a public platform, they must stand by it. What is the problem?

As the issue is not on the agenda, I must bring the discussion to a close. Members' comments are on the record.

I thank members and wish them a happy festive period. I will see you all on Wednesday 7 January. Feel free to take one of the spare mince pies.

Meeting closed at 16:55.