Promoting the Parliament
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how it promotes the Parliament, its values and its work. (S4O-04792)
The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body promotes the Parliament, its values and its work through supporting members in our work, and through a number of offices across the Parliament that work together to deliver a public engagement strategy.
Increasingly, we are seeing the direct benefits of that engagement work in the scrutiny work of the Parliament’s committees. Perhaps the most visible recent example of success in that area is the way in which the British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill was improved as a direct result of the Parliament developing a close working relationship with Scotland’s deaf and deafblind community.
I thank the member for that response; indeed, commendable work is taking place.
Lockheed Martin is the world’s largest arms company, and it has been given money by the Scottish Government. It has also been given publicity by the Scottish Parliament when the company provided a prize for an awards ceremony in this building. The Green and Independent Group raised that issue and was advised, in a response, that Lockheed Martin was a
“public sector supplier of IT systems”.
The member will be aware that there are increasing concerns daily about pension investment. I regret that nothing suggests that the SPCB or indeed the pension trustees recognise that. We recently debated Trident, yet we invest in a company that supplies a propulsion system.
Would the member agree that it is time for the Scottish Parliament to accept responsibility for our own affairs and not hide behind pension fund managers? Would she further agree that it is time to sort out our customer-client relationship with those fund managers and divest from arms, fossil fuels and tobacco?
Will the SPCB agreed to undertake and make public a risk assessment of the reputational damage such arrangements, associations or funding are causing to an institution that I know we all hold very dearly?
I acknowledge the member’s long-standing interest in this issue. Let me be absolutely clear that, under the Scottish Parliamentary Pensions Act 2009, the day-to-day administration, including any investment strategy, for the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme is the sole responsibility of the fund trustees and not of the corporate body. I understand that the fund trustees, who have appointed Baillie Gifford as fund manager for the scheme, have delegated responsibility for the day-to-day investment management to Baillie Gifford.
As the member is aware, the pensions contributions are invested in a pooled fund. I stress that the independent fund manager, Baillie Gifford, has the day-to-day responsibility for management decisions. It operates an environmental, social and governance policy for its investment and is also a signatory to the United Nations principles for responsible investment.
I reinforce that the SPCB’s role in relation to that is clearly separated, in the Scottish Parliamentary Pensions Act 2009, from that of the fund trustees.
Trade Union Bill (Implications for Scottish Parliament Staff)
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what consideration it has given to the implications for its employees of the proposals in the United Kingdom Government’s Trade Union Bill. (S4O-04758)
The SPCB is aware of the contents of the bill, and officials have begun to assess what systems would have to be amended or put in place should it be passed in its current form. We will continue to monitor developments at Westminster to ensure that we are ready to meet any resultant legal requirements on the Parliament. The corporate body values its strong relationship with trade unions and will continue to work with them in implementing any action resulting from the bill.
I have to say that I find the answer from the corporate body very disappointing indeed. The bill is regressive in nature and will do nothing to facilitate good working arrangements within this Parliament. I would have hoped that the corporate body might have been willing to take the route that many local authorities in Scotland are now taking. Is the SPCB willing to guarantee that, regardless of what legislation the UK Parliament passes, if it is not amended or does not have significant changes made to it, the corporate body will continue with approaches such as check-off and facility time in order to ensure that trade unions in this Parliament are treated in the way that we would all want them to be, as partners in negotiation and as worthwhile enterprises in and of themselves?
Even though there was overwhelming opposition to the bill on Tuesday, it would be inappropriate for the SPCB to take a position on the bill. The corporate body will continue to monitor developments and will, as with any legislation, take such steps as are necessary to comply with any legal requirements placed on the Parliament. As I mentioned in my response to the member’s earlier question, we have a strong relationship with our unions and we will do everything that we can to maintain that positive relationship, regardless of the outcome of the Trade Union Bill.
As the member and the corporate body are aware, we had a debate in the chamber on Tuesday, when an overwhelming majority of members in the chamber voted against the Trade Union Bill and expressed their opposition to the bill. Surely the corporate body should take that on board when making policy decisions on behalf of this Parliament.
Again, I will just say that, at this particular time, it is inappropriate for the SPCB to take a position on the bill.
Display of Artwork
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what criteria it uses when selecting or accepting artwork for display. (S4O-04791)
Artwork accepted by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body for the Parliament’s art collection for display in the building is chosen in line with the art collection development policy. The selection and commissioning of artwork for display is guided by key themes, including: Scotland’s identity and diversity and the Parliament’s relationship with the people; the relationship of the people with the land and sea; and, of course, Scotland’s history. We have placed emphasis on acquiring work from artists whose reputation is already well established and on acquiring works that represent key aspects of their practice.
I know of people who have sought to donate works of art and have had a negative response. I can understand that. It is a rare and sensitive thing to select art for such a building. What I do not understand is why the recent work of art “Service”, now hanging in the garden lobby, passed any approval test. It gives offence to many—not only artistically. Scotland has produced fine war artists who might show the awesome, bloody beauty of war and what our Army does. There are acclaimed artists, masters of art, art critics and art historians here in Edinburgh who might all have advised our Parliament, and we might have seen the Army in Scotland reflected as its history truly deserves.
Would the SPCB be willing to consult Scotland’s acclaimed and renowned experts with regard to any future artworks?
We do, of course, have a professional art curator, and we take advice where appropriate. That already happens.
In relation to the recent acquisition of “Service”, by artist David Rowlands, the painting was gifted to the Scottish Parliament by the Army in Scotland and was unveiled in October. We felt that it was a unique opportunity to mark the relationship between the Army and Scottish society through the years, especially as it was a gift from the Army.
It was part of the first world war centenary commemorations, and the commission was funded by voluntary donations from Army communities across Scotland. The painting was unveiled on the 100th anniversary of the battle of Loos, and it will tour venues around Scotland during 2016.
Scottish Parliamentary Pension Scheme (Investments)
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what its position is on the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme investing a reported £2.1 million in fossil fuels while the Parliament is trying to move toward renewables. (S4O-04760)
Under the Scottish Parliamentary Pensions Act 2009, the day-to-day administration, including investment strategy, for the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme is the sole responsibility of the fund trustees. However, I understand that investment in fossil fuels has decreased significantly from 11.05 per cent in September 2010 to 3.23 per cent in September 2015.
In light of recent press reports about what the Scottish parliamentary pension scheme is investing in, I agree with John Finnie. I have already received concerns from my constituents, and we cannot simply hide behind a fund manager. Can I be assured that discussions will be held with the investment company to clarify what the fund should and should not be investing in?
For the fund trustees to direct any investments, they would need to change to a segregated portfolio arrangement. That would be a decision for the fund trustees, given their statutory position.
School Visits (Pupils from Deprived Areas)
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how it ensures that pupils from deprived areas have equal access to visiting the Parliament. (S4O-04759)
The programme of education sessions in schools and in the Parliament reaches somewhere in the region of 20,000 to 22,000 pupils each year, and it offers a range of online and other curriculum-based resources. Those things are all provided free of charge. That outreach service, combined with an inward visits programme, provides great scope geographically and socioeconomically to allow pupils to take part in parliamentary work.
The team undertakes targeted work on activities to support our Parliament days programme as well as specific events such as this year’s inspiring young women event at Holyrood. It helps to ensure that a wide range of opportunities are available to schools to allow them to engage with the Parliament in a way that best suits their needs.
I am sure that Liz Smith agrees that visits to Parliament are particularly important to bring this place, and democracy, alive for children. A school in one of the most deprived areas of Dundee, in my constituency, has a primary 7 class that has been studying the Scottish Parliament and planning to visit. However, the school faces a £700 bill for a bus to Parliament that it simply cannot afford.
What data does the SPCB hold and track on how many schools in deprived areas actually get to visit Parliament? After all, the Parliament belongs to everyone in Scotland and should be accessible to all children, irrespective of which school they attend.
Jenny Marra makes a good point about accessibility, which is clearly very important for all pupils, wherever they might be. We have a good system for tracking which schools are using the Scottish Parliament, but the SPCB is very open to suggestions about how we could improve that aspect at any stage. We are not in a position to provide funding for travel—two other members have raised that issue in the past, and it is a difficult situation for the SPCB to attend to—but we will take on board any suggestions that Jenny Marra might like to make.
Server Access Speeds (MSPs’ Regional Offices)
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what action it is taking to improve the speed of server access from members’ regional offices. (S4O-04793)
The speed of the broadband services available to regional offices depends on the public communications infrastructure and varies from location to location. The SPCB ensures that local offices benefit from the best broadband service available to the offices, and it has been piloting solutions that are independent of the public infrastructure to help to address the situation where the public broadband infrastructure is not of sufficient quality.
In addition, we have rolled out our new software and supporting hardware to optimise traffic from all regional offices to Holyrood servers in order to improve performance and increase the capacity of the internet connection to Holyrood on which services are routed. We are looking forward to working in the context of the new voice and data contract on fresh and innovative ideas to address the on-going challenges.
I appreciate the SPCB’s response, particularly given that it came from a renowned expert on information technology, as Mr Pentland declared himself to be on Monday night in Motherwell.
Despite the fact that internet connection speeds in the regional offices are excellent—a 50MB speed is almost akin to superfast broadband, and the performance of the two personal computers are excellent—when members log into the Parliament’s servers through the Citrix online plug-in, there are speed and performance issues in using many of the programmes.
That leads to staff being forced to work outside the Citrix environment, which can lead to safety conflicts in shared folders. Central processing unit usage often shoots up and causes severe system lag, particularly when users are attempting to use Outlook search facilities. I hope that the SPCB can investigate the matter and report accordingly, and that we can all get superfast speeds in all our regional offices throughout Scotland.
I am sure that we are all aware of individual offices struggling with poor connection speeds. That is why the Parliament’s business and information technology office will work with individual offices to look at the different ways that they work to see whether any streamlining can be achieved by changing the methods of connecting back to the service at Holyrood. That can involve visiting offices to advise on techniques that might address and help to alleviate any issues.
On the very detailed question from the member, I will make sure that he gets a very detailed answer from BIT.
Has any consideration been given to alternative software strategies? The direct connection using Citrix relies on the system being open all the time, but by using appropriate software strategies we can escape that and many connection problems.
Again, that is a detailed question, and I will get BIT to give the member a detailed response.
Winter Weather (Staff Welfare)
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what action it takes to address staff welfare issues related to winter weather. (S4O-04794)
The SPCB provides a number of initiatives to address staff welfare during the winter months, including flu vaccinations and support for individuals with health conditions exacerbated by winter weather. In circumstances where staff are unable to attend work due to transport disruption as a result of severe weather, flexible working arrangements such as homeworking or reduced hours may be offered on a short-term basis.
I have never quite understood why one of our security staff has to be stationed halfway up the corridor to the chamber all the time when we are in plenary session. That corridor is probably the coldest part of the building, and over the next few months it is going to be a very uncomfortable place for the security staff to stand, with little to do.
I know that those staff have been given permission to have a small electric heater with them. Can the SPCB reassess whether there is actually a need for security staff to stand in that empty corridor all day? If there is such a need, can the staff at least be allowed to put a coat on?
I take on board the member’s question, and I will make sure that we come back with a relevant answer.