European and External Relations Committee, 27 Sep 2005

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Official Report 185KB pdf

---

Items in Private

My first task as convener is to ask members whether they wish to consider items 7 and 8 in private. Item 7 is the consideration of options for the future work programme, as discussed at the away day and back here, item 8 is the first draft of the committee's report on the Executive's fresh talent initiative.

Do members agree?

No. Welcome to the chair, convener. I can tell you that this is a great committee to be on. I am just sorry that I cannot spend more time on it today.

I agree entirely with item 8 going into private session, as that is in line with what we have done in the past with draft reports. However, I feel that the work programme should not go into private session. We had a useful, positive discussion at the away day. The issues are known to all the committee members. I do not see why, given Jim Wallace's ideals about freedom of information, we should conceal debate on that issue.

I would have said that whether or not I was to be present for the later stages. However, from a purely personal viewpoint, I would find it very helpful to read the Official Report to find out the reasons for determining which subjects were taken forward and/or rejected.

I make a plea to the committee: I see no harm in debating item 7 in public. I ask the committee to support me in that.

I understand that you have your substitute in Mr Brownlee; perhaps he will pass on information to you if the committee decides to hold item 7 in private.

I tend to agree with Phil Gallie—I hope that he is not utterly shocked by that. In the interests of openness and transparency, I feel that there are sound arguments for what Phil proposes. I see no argument against it. I take it that the papers that have been submitted to committee members, which outline the various suggestions for our future work programme that cropped up during our away day, are available under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. I do not see why our subsequent discussion on our future work programme should not be on the record.

For the record, those papers are not available at the moment, but they may well become available.

I will be true to the ideals that Mr Gallie has already espoused. I do not think that there is anything under item 7 that we need be afraid of. I could be upsetting apple-carts here, because this might be the sort of thing that has always been done in private, but that is not necessarily a reason for continuing to take such items in private. My experience of my two or three European and External Relations Committee meetings so far is that it is a mature committee, where people put their cases reasonably. I do not think that the suggestions before us give cause for any great secrecy. I do not see why we should not have our discussion in the open.

I understand that such consideration has always been in private in the past. Obviously, however, it is up to committee members.

I do not have particularly strong feelings on the matter. In practical terms, it is housekeeping. It basically involves members looking at their diaries and deciding what we are going to do when, and how we are going to approach things. There is something to be said for doing that in private. As a general matter of principle, however, I agree that policy issues should be discussed in public, although I am not sure that it is absolutely necessary or entirely desirable in this case.

I was not present at the away day but, having glanced through the papers, I do not see anything that could not be in the public domain. I think that we should be prepared to discuss the proposals in public. Despite what John Home Robertson says about diary commitments and so on, we are a mature enough committee to be able to set a timetable in an appropriate manner.

When I first noted that it was proposed to hold item 7 in private, I was a little bit surprised, and I checked with the clerks to ask why that was the case. They reminded me that, on previous occasions, we have taken such items in private. Having read the papers, I have no particular difficulty with our holding item 7 in public. I was interested to hear the views of other members. There seems to be consensus that we could hold our discussion in public. I would not be averse to that.

That seems to be the consensus of the committee. Is everyone agreed that item 7 be held in public?

Members indicated agreement.

Is everyone agreed that item 8 be held in private?

Members indicated agreement.

I thank you, convener, and other colleagues. I will depart and leave things in Derek Brownlee's very capable hands.

That must be the first time that Mr Gallie has won a vote in this committee.

That is not true, if members wish to think back. However, it is a fairly unusual circumstance, particularly with a unanimous decision.

Let us hope that it is not something that we continue.