Work Programme
Item 4 is our approach to developing a work programme. Members will find enclosed with their papers a short briefing note from the clerks. Are there any comments?
It is important that we consider a couple of issues. First, it is important that the Minister for Europe, External Affairs and Culture come before the committee at an early opportunity to outline the new Executive's strategy for European and external affairs. It would be ideal if that could happen before the summer recess so that we could all have some idea of what we need to think about over the summer in relation to our work programme. I accept, however, that time is tight, so if it is not possible to do that before the summer recess, then we should certainly have the minister come before us at our first meeting after the recess. There could be some significant differences between the previous Executive's strategy and that of the new Executive.
Secondly, the legacy paper mentions an area in which I have a particular interest, because I was one of our representatives on the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body. We need to look at the Executive's role in the British-Irish Council, and we perhaps need to help in developing links with the other United Kingdom devolved Administrations and with the Irish Government and Parliament. That is important now that devolution has been fully restored in Northern Ireland, so we need to do more work in those areas.
That sounds sensible. Without pre-empting the committee's consideration, the clerks have been in touch with the minister's office—if the committee wants to talk to the minister before our away day, and certainly before recess, provisional arrangements have been made. We can return to those arrangements, depending on what other members feel.
I agree that it would be helpful to see the minister before the recess, so I am happy to proceed along those lines. I would also be happy for the work programme to be developed more fully during the recess and at an away day, and to leave to the clerks, the convener and the deputy convener any decision about the format for such an away day.
I agree with Iain Smith's proposal for having the minister before the committee. Although we have regularly taken evidence from the Executive, there might have been a change in priorities. It would therefore be helpful for the committee to identify any likely changes, because they would inform our work programme.
One of the annexes to the previous committee's legacy paper suggests some issues for the Parliament's European officer to track. Things come on and off the European Commission's agenda quite quickly—it can change fast. I understand that 10 pieces of proposed legislation in the Commission's earlier work programme have been abandoned. If we are to have another meeting before the recess, it would be helpful to have the European officer along to update us on changes. We have all been focusing on other things since March, when the legacy paper was written.
Towards the end of the previous session, we felt it important to consider how to organise our work programme better—that is outlined in the legacy paper. We concluded that we should examine issues in two ways: upstream and downstream. I call them PF and TIE: that is, policy development and the formulation of legislation on the upstream side, and transposition, implementation and enforcement on the downstream side. We can identify lobbying upstream and European scrutiny downstream. We came to that quite late in the previous session and we did not get the procedures in place for the committee to analyse things in that way.
It might be helpful to think in those terms at our away day. The downstream side—transposition, implementation and enforcement—brings fewer opportunities for Scottish influence, but we could have considerable influence on the upstream side, which concerns policy development and early legislative proposals. Perhaps we should develop that way of thinking and transpose that into our work programme.
I echo what Iain Smith said about the opportunity for joint working with the other devolved Administrations in the UK: we should seek to do that early on. We should also consider the other regions with legislative powers and the big issues that they are identifying, in which there might be opportunities for collaboration.
We have yet not talked about the external relations side of our remit. In the previous session, we focused on European scrutiny and so on. In the legacy paper and in the paper that Jim Wallace produced, we set out some pointers for possible ways ahead, but we did not do much on external and international relations. We might have scope to spend more time on that at the away day.
Late on in the previous session, we considered international aid in Malawi. The committee might have an opportunity to review how that is working, whether the aid money is going to the right projects and what the benefits are to Scotland and Malawi.
There is also the matter of offices being set up in Washington and Beijing, and we spoke about the possibility of having an office in India. I am not sure what has happened about that, but we could perhaps take up those matters with the Minister for Europe, External Affairs and Culture next week, or whenever we arrange for her to come before us.
That was helpful, particularly given your work on the previous European and External Relations Committee. Such continuity and knowledge will be very helpful for the committee's future work.
I am picking up that the committee would welcome an early opportunity to have the minister before us. That should be possible, looking at the programme for Tuesday next week. Perhaps the previous committee's legacy paper and "Report on an inquiry into the scrutiny of European legislation" should form the main thrust of the away day, in addition to a number of items that have already been highlighted, including international development in the context of our external relations remit and the value of our having offices elsewhere. We will leave the clerks to go through those matters in some detail—including opportunities for relationships under the British-Irish Council or further afield—and to develop their thinking on them in time for the away day.
Irene Oldfather raised something that I think is worth putting on the agenda for next week: we should get information and an update—by way of a written briefing—from our European officer on which proposals have been dropped and which are still valid. I propose that we invite the European officer to our away day. It would be helpful to have that link and to have there the officer who will be able to discuss with us what is going on. In addition, we should find out whether Scotland's MEPs are available. We will consider organising different slots in the away day in which we can engage other stakeholders in the work of the committee. Does that seem sensible?
Members indicated agreement.
I seek the committee's formal agreement to hold an away day. We will leave it to the clerks to liaise on the arrangements and the programme. Is that agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you. There being nothing else on today's agenda, I thank you all for attending.
Meeting closed at 11:16.