Plenary, 06 Sep 2006
Meeting date: Wednesday, September 6, 2006
Official Report
522KB pdf
Parliamentary Bureau Motions
The next item of business is consideration of two Parliamentary Bureau motions. I ask Margaret Curran to move motion S2M-4747, on rule 9.6.3A, and motion S2M-4748, on the remit of the Communities Committee.
Motions moved,
That the Parliament agrees under Rule 9.6.3A that the Parliament shall consider the general principles of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill on the fourth sitting day after the publication of the lead committee report.
That the Parliament agrees that the remit of the Communities Committee be amended to—
To consider and report on matters relating to housing and area regeneration, poverty, voluntary sector issues, charity law; matters relating to the land use planning system and building standards; such other matters as fall within the responsibility of the Minister for Communities; and health promotion and nutrition in schools.—[Ms Margaret Curran.]
After the high jinks of the previous debate, it is possible that my request will seem like small beer, but I ask the Parliament to give serious thought to motion S2M-4748 before voting on it.
In common with other members, I recognise the importance of health promotion and nutrition in schools, and what I say is in no way intended to undermine that. If the Parliament decides to ask us to consider the proposed bill on that subject, all members of the Communities Committee will do as serious and thorough a job as we can.
However, the proposed addition to the Communities Committee's remit is not a reasonable one to make. The change is being made so that another piece of legislation can be squeezed in before the present parliamentary session comes to a close. I ask the Parliament not to allow our committee system to turn into a legislative production line.
The job of scrutinising the work of Government and holding ministers to account is about more than just passing bills. Since the 2003 election, the Communities Committee—which already has a broad remit that covers issues of importance to the most excluded people in Scotland and the communities that are hardest hit by poverty—has had almost no time to direct its own work or to carry out its own inquiries; it has spent almost all its time dealing with legislation. Although it has done so conscientiously and with care, it should have time to carry out its own inquiries.
Another part of the committee's remit, which is part of the remit of all committees, is to conduct post-legislative scrutiny. At the moment, we are considering the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill, a large number of the provisions of which do not appear in the bill itself but will be included in regulations and guidance. If the Communities Committee's successor in the next session is treated in the same way and is turned into a legislative sausage machine, it will be unable to devote the time that is required to carry out proper post-legislative scrutiny of the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill and the other legislation that the present committee has dealt with.
Therefore, I ask the Parliament not to allow the committee system to be used in the way that is proposed and to oppose motion S2M-4748.
I thank the Greens for alerting me to the fact that they intend to oppose Parliamentary Bureau motion S2M-4748.
I put on record the fact that I take extremely seriously the commitments of the Parliament's committees, acknowledge their contribution to the process of legislative scrutiny and the other work that they do and recognise the expertise that they have developed. However, it is stretching things a bit to describe the committees as legislative sausage machines; I do not think that that description is appropriate. The people of Scotland send us here to legislate and our job as legislators should be a priority.
That said, I am sure that all business managers would acknowledge that I have gone to extreme lengths to accommodate the Parliament's workload. I have sought to negotiate with them to an extent that is not necessarily required of me and to involve them in the solutions that we come up with. I fully understand that people do not like it when they get a phone call or a knock on the door from a business manager who suggests that they take on extra work, but I plead with the Parliament by emphasising our responsibility to get the proposed bill through.
Although the pressure of work on other committees meant that I had little alternative but to allocate the proposed bill to the Communities Committee, I believe that the committee has some expertise in the field of nutrition and health promotion. Previous inquiries and its work on other legislation have shown that the Communities Committee has considerable expertise when it comes to the interests of disadvantaged people and that it has the capacity to undertake the proposed consideration.
I ask for the co-operation of all parties in the Parliament to ensure that we undertake the work that we can. Many members applaud Susan Deacon and other members when they talk about consensus and about trying to work together constructively. It is very disappointing for us to abandon that constructive approach on this kind of issue.
The question on those motions will be put at decision time.