Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee, 24 Nov 1999

Meeting date: Wednesday, November 24, 1999

Official Report 284KB pdf

---

Work Programme

We now have two brief items to resolve, which I hope will not take too long. Members will have a paper in front of them on agenda item 2, the work programme. We discussed it at our meeting two weeks ago, and I have been reflecting on the composition of the programme.

I was particularly concerned that three of our inquiry programmes in January and February were devoted to case studies—the collection of data—and one was devoted to the case study report. I felt that that constrained the committee quite a lot, and that we could undertake some more practical case study work by appointing reporters on behalf of the committee. That would free up a couple of meetings for us to undertake other work that we might be interested in carrying out. A further paper, "Subjects for Further Inquiries", relates to that—we will consider it later.

The first recommendation on our work programme is:

"The committee agrees to appoint three Reporters to lead small groups of members to undertake a case study visit to a local area identified by the committee, and to report back to the committee."

The second recommendation is that I seek the authority of the conveners liaison group to carry out that work and for the expense incurred as a result. Finally, there are a number of meetings in the work programme that we plan to hold in private. I will seek the committee's agreement to hold those meetings in private, so that we can resolve our position on the various stages of the case study report.

Members have the work programme in front of them; I would also like guidance from them on which case studies would be appropriate, so that the clerks can begin some preparatory work. You will notice from the work programme that we propose to use our first meeting of the new year to examine one case study. The first case study will have a formal hearing; the three others will be carried out by groups of members acting on behalf of the committee.

I open that up for discussion.

The amendment to the work programme makes sense. I am wholly in favour of appointing three reporters to lead small groups of members to undertake a case study and to visit local areas. That was suggested as a possible means of inquiry by people who have given evidence. It has much to commend it.

The amendment would free up two single-session inquiries. One case study must be on local economic development services; the other must be on workplace training. We had thought of considering what might be construed as good practice in local economic development services: we could choose a good example of a local enterprise company using best practice, to see how it operates in its locality. That might be a suitable subject for one case study.

Are there any other comments?

If not, we should deal with the recommendations on page 1 of the work programme, because we must record these things formally.

The first recommendation is:

"The committee agrees to appoint three Reporters to lead small groups of members to undertake a case study visit to a local area identified by the committee, and to report back to the committee."

Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Can I have suggestions for who those three reporters should be? Will I consult on that and take it a step forward?

The committee itself will have to agree on the members chosen.

We can do that at the next meeting. I will come back to the committee with a recommendation.

Members indicated agreement.

The second recommendation is:

"The committee authorises the convener to approach the Conveners' Liaison Group for endorsement."

Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

On the third recommendation, can we confirm that we will hold in private the parts of the meetings during which we are required to agree our reports—on 8 December, 1 March, 5 April and possibly 3 May?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you.