Cross-party Groups
Good morning. I realise that there are major traffic and weather problems this morning, so we are thin on the ground, but we will proceed with the first item of business, which is the motion from the Standards Committee, S1M-338, in the name of Mr Mike Rumbles.
I am pleased to have the opportunity, on behalf of the Standards Committee, to present this report on the "Regulation of Cross-Party Groups".
Cross-party groups contain members from across the parties who share an interest in a particular subject or cause. Members representing different political views have made clear, in a number of policy areas, that they wish to come together to discuss and promote matters of mutual interest and concern.
It is right that the Parliament should support this development by providing facilities and recognition to properly constituted groups. The report addresses the need to put in place a framework to allow such groups to develop within this Parliament. The principles that were central to the thinking of the Standards Committee in devising a possible framework were inclusiveness, openness and transparency.
The development of cross-party groups will provide a real opportunity for including people from a cross-section of society in Scotland in the work of the Parliament. This is an inclusive Parliament. It is the expectation that cross-party groups will contain not just MSPs but those with specialist knowledge or direct experience of the relevant policy areas, whether they be interested members of the public or from voluntary organisations, local authorities, universities or the private sector. MSPs need to hear from those, for example, with experience of how policies operate in practice and those with experience in other social settings if we are to produce the legislation that Scotland needs to meet the challenges of the future.
Cross-party groups can be expected to develop and influence the work of our Parliament. It is hoped that they will contribute significantly to policy thinking to assist members in their tasks of understanding and investigating issues of importance to the people of Scotland and to assist them in their scrutiny and development of legislation. Because those groups will have influence it is important that they operate in accordance with good practice, that their activities are in the public interest and that they are open and transparent. That is why an effective system of regulation is essential.
Public confidence in the Parliament demands that those groups are not used as a vehicle for promoting vested interests. Groups that wish to be recognised by the Parliament must submit their application to the Standards Committee for approval and must demonstrate to the committee that their purpose is of genuine public interest. If the committee doubts this and thinks that a group is designed, for example, to further particular commercial interests, it will not be approved.
Groups must be genuinely cross-party. They should not be used to promote the policies of one section of the Parliament or its supporters in the wider community. Before any group is approved it will need to undertake to comply with the rules set out in the committee report. The rules that the Standards Committee is recommending are designed to ensure openness through public advertising on the Parliament's website and the requirement that all meetings take place in public. The wider public need to be fully aware of their activities.
These procedures also require full transparency about a group's membership, including both MSPs and non-MSPs, its purpose, identification of its officers and funding or staff assistance that it receives. All those matters must be registered by groups before approval and new or changed details must be entered in the register as they occur. This information will be publicly available in the office of the Standards Committee clerk and on the Parliament's website. Any member wishing to set up a cross-party group needs, therefore, to speak to the clerk of the Standards Committee in the first instance. The committee will ensure that registered cross-party groups meet the requirements of the scheme.
I am confident that a properly regulated system of cross-party groups will be of benefit to all those connected to the Parliament and all those who want to engage with its work. For groups and individuals in Scottish society, cross-party groups will be another significant means by which they can make their views known to MSPs and will promote the essential interaction that is needed between the Parliament and civic Scotland.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees the arrangements for the regulation of Cross-Party Groups in the Scottish Parliament set out in the annex to the Second Report of the Standards Committee and that these should apply with immediate effect.
Cross-party groups provide a framework that allows the participation of civic Scotland in parliamentary matters. They are headed by MSPs and help us to be better informed about the issues that are important to the people of Scotland. It is fair to say that organisations outside the chamber are anticipating this document more eagerly than some of our colleagues. For civic Scotland, cross- party groups represent one of the routes by which access to Parliament can be gained.
Many of those groups have emerged and represent issues as diverse as oil and gas and the elderly. Such groups are important to the ethos of the Parliament. In order for them to remain valuable, they must be regulated. Cross-party groups are important to the transparent, open and accessible culture that needs to be fostered in the Parliament. I think it has to do with putting one's money where one's mouth is.
The recommendations of the consultative steering group set out that the Parliament should be open, participative and democratic. The group paid particular attention to the role of civic Scotland in terms of the sharing of power. Paragraph 17 of the group's report states:
"Power-sharing is not only about the balance of power between the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament, but also about the empowerment of external groups and individuals in all sectors of Scottish society."
Cross-party groups as well as committees contribute to the ethos of our Parliament and provide a channel for information, criticism and advice. More important, the groups allow MSPs to explore longer-term policy direction on a cross- party basis and to use the expertise that members of the group can bring.
Cross-party groups are also useful in areas where the Scottish Parliament does not, as yet, have legislative competence. That means that there can be debates on issues that are outside the parliamentary remit. That feature of cross- party groups is particularly welcomed by those organisations in civic Scotland whose interests are not devolved matters.
In order to remain valuable, however, cross- party groups must be regulated. Mike Rumbles has already outlined the features of such regulation. Everyone must be clear about the purpose of the groups and who is responsible for them. The groups must remain essentially parliamentary in nature. That is why the Standards Committee has insisted that MSPs should take up the senior positions in the groups.
The groups have been the subject of much debate in the Standards Committee, and I am pleased that members of the committee from all parties have unanimously agreed the report. The subject of this debate is important, as the Parliament was set up to be inclusive. Cross-party groups are a method of ensuring that the Parliament is so, but they will work only if they are properly administered.
Cross-party groups are a framework to encourage participation in Parliament, but they are not the sole method of influencing the Parliament. There is a danger that the existence of the cross- party groups could be used as an excuse to ignore the rest of civic Scotland and the other groups that are involved. Parliament could consult the cross- party group on the elderly and claim that it has consulted widely, as that group could be seen to be representative of all the elderly groups. That cannot be allowed to happen. The cross-party groups should not become exclusive. The Parliament's members should be open to all views, regardless of where they come from.
In short, while I appreciate that cross-party groups are an important mechanism of participation, they are only one of many. In order that we get the best out of the cross-party groups, it is important that we have a framework of regulation. The Standards Committee has achieved the right balance in the document. I ask members to give it their support.
I rise to support Mr Mike Rumbles's motion. As convener of the Standards Committee, he has conducted our proceedings with good will and humour. It has been a pleasure to work with him.
Mr Rumbles is right to stress the need for inclusiveness, openness and transparency. Cross- party groups can be of enormous benefit to a great many. Tricia Marwick is right to say that they are vitally important for the ethos of the Parliament. They are a valuable way of examining issues that are not necessarily politically controversial, and of encouraging rational discussion of problems. That can provide a pleasant contrast to the political cut and thrust that we more usually see. Although entertaining, and based on the expression of deeply held convictions, the latter debates can generate more heat than light and can merely reinforce existing convictions.
In a cross-party group, it is possible to debate matters at greater length, without people taking up
deeply entrenched positions. Such groups provide a greater opportunity to persuade others of a certain point of view. If we, as MSPs, are to properly scrutinise and develop legislation to match Scotland's needs, it will be useful to hear from those in the public, private and voluntary sectors, and from academia and members of the public with specialised policy knowledge and experience. The Standards Committee's proposals for cross-party groups should put in place a properly regulated system, which will make possible regular contact between MSPs and those concerned groups.
The committee believes strongly that, once that system is in place, it will not be long before there are cross-party groups on a wide variety of issues as diverse as the needs of the disabled, the elderly, children's rights, Scottish sport, voluntary organisations, the arts and health. The groups will always have an important role to play in any Parliament. Where fundamental principles conflict, they will never replace debate, but where there is a basis of consensus, they will provide a forum to discuss ideas, with a view to taking matters forward and possibly turning ideas into legislation.
That is an effective parliamentary framework, ensuring inclusiveness, openness and transparency. It will provide the framework to enable the groups concerned to have a constructive influence in future.
I support the motion.
Like the other speakers, I welcome the proposal on cross-party groups. We have been waiting for the proposal so that the groups can set themselves up formally; hitherto, they have been shadow groups, or whatever the expression is. The groups are particularly important because the official committees, if I may call them that, in this Parliament are very important. Each covers a wide range and is unlikely to give enough attention to the subjects that are meant to be covered. Cross- party groups, therefore, have an important role to play.
I raise two points. First, because of the shortness of our residential parliamentary week— or however it would be described—there are few windows of opportunity for groups to meet. One of the problems is that the different political groups meet at different times. It may be beyond the bounds of possibility—I am a naive and hopeful person—but if the parliamentary groups met at the same time, it would free up more time for cross- party groups. That is at least worth considering.
Secondly, although I am not suggesting an amendment to these excellent regulations, Mike
Rumbles and his colleagues might, in future, consider whether there could be special rules to facilitate and encourage groups that include our Westminster colleagues, and even, in this new dispensation, our Welsh and Irish colleagues, to consider issues of common concern. There are issues, such as helping the elderly, which are of mutual interest, and on which we could collaborate. There may be matters that our members with an interest in rural affairs could discuss with Assembly members from Northern Ireland and Wales. I suggest that we have special rules to encourage joint all-party groups.
I am happy to support the motion.
I am very happy to support the motion, although one problem has occurred to me over the past few days. The wave power commission, which was set up a few months ago with all-party support, has already elected a chair and a secretary from outside the Parliament. The new regulations put us in a slightly invidious position. In one sense, there is a clear commercial aim behind the commission because we wish to promote wind and wave power developments in Scotland. I would welcome some clarification of the definition of commercial promotion, particularly if, as we hope, we set up a renewables group.
I alert Mike Rumbles to the fact that we might have to ask the Standards Committee to reconsider what commercial interest might mean for some cross-party groups, particularly those supporting renewable energy.
As someone who, for much of the Standards Committees discussion on this subject, was on a sabbatical, I had not planned to speak this morning. However, there are two points that I would like to make.
First, I congratulate my colleagues on the Standards Committee and the committee clerks, who have put in a great deal of work, on producing an excellent set of proposals. Secondly, I would like to highlight the fact that the Scottish Parliament is leading the way in this area. Such regulation is not to be found elsewhere in Britain. It is good that Scotland is seen to be regulating cross-party groups to allow the general public, civic Scotland, as Tricia Marwick mentioned, and our parliamentarians to understand what is expected of cross-party groups. The framework is straightforward, but will cover future eventualities.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton outlined several groups that have already been established. I
expect that Des McNulty will answer Robin Harper's specific question about those groups that have already been established. The regulations go some way towards being flexible for such groups.
The layout of the regulations allows civic Scotland—those people who want to work with the Parliament—to understand what we mean and what we are doing. It is not a set of rules for the sake of a set of rules, but one that will support the work of the cross-party groups.
I recommend the regulations to the chamber.
On behalf of the Executive, I thank Mike Rumbles and the members and staff of the Standards Committee for the work that they have put into preparing the report on the regulation of cross-party groups. At a time when the committee has had other important matters to deal with, including the preparation of a code of conduct, it is good that it has still found time to examine the question of cross-party groups. I am pleased that the Parliament has this opportunity to consider the committee's proposals.
The Standards Committee noted that several approaches have already been made, seeking the establishment of cross-party groups. It is important that those groups operate in a transparent manner. It will benefit the Parliament, cross-party groups and the public to have a clear set of rules within which to work.
One of the key principles set out by consultative steering group was that
"the Scottish Parliament should be accessible, open, responsive, and develop procedures which make possible a participative approach to the development, consideration and scrutiny of policy and legislation."
The CSG wanted to ensure a meaningful dialogue between the Parliament and civic society. The establishment of the Scottish civic forum will play an important part in stimulating dialogue between the Parliament, the Executive and civic society, and the Executive has been pleased to offer £300,000 over this year and the next two years to assist it in its work.
The Executive is also looking to be more proactive in its approach to consultation on its policies and proposals for legislation. As Tricia Marwick has already said, the framework for the establishment of cross-party groups offers another channel for communication between the Parliament and civic society that can complement the work of the Scottish civic forum and the Executive.
In their responses to the CSG's consultation, voluntary organisations and interest groups were keen that they should be able to develop ideas via recognised parliamentary forums. Cross-party groups are one way in which voluntary organisations and minority groups, among others, will be able to consider and debate issues of interest and to develop ideas.
It is important to recognise, and I believe that the committee has done so, that groups other than cross-party groups may seek to have significant interaction with the Parliament. We should certainly not be creating mechanisms that hinder individuals or interest groups from interacting with the Parliament. We should also recognise that cross-party groups are different beasts from committees of the Parliament, and we need to ensure that there is no confusion between the two.
The Standards Committee's report makes it clear that groups must be "Parliamentary in character" and that their purposes must be "of genuine public interest". I know that the committee put a lot of thought into determining how to ensure that groups would be parliamentary in character.
Association with, and recognition by, the Parliament as a cross-party group is likely to be of considerable value. The views of a cross-party group of the Scottish Parliament are likely to receive more attention than the views of the individual members of that group. As such, the Parliament needs to ensure that it lends its name with care. The committee has not attempted to define clearly what "Parliamentary in character" means, and prefers to leave that to develop in practice. I therefore urge the committee to keep a close eye on what is happening so that we avoid any possibility of groups losing their parliamentary character.
Rule 2 in the report requires that a group must include at least one member from each of the major parties, but provides for this requirement to be waived by the Standards Committee in particular cases. I understand why the committee wishes to have that flexibility, but hope that every effort will be made by those wishing to establish groups to find willing members in every party.
The Standards Committee noted that it may wish to recommend amendments to the procedures set out in its report in the light of experience of the operation of cross-party groups. That is perfectly appropriate. We are still in the early days, and the committee has had to develop procedures without the benefit of any real experience of cross-party groups in the Scottish Parliament. I hope that the committee will keep a close eye on the operation of the system so that cross-party groups enhance the work of the Parliament.
I am pleased to support the recommendations of the Standards Committee.
I call Des McNulty to wind up on behalf of the Standards Committee. You have until 10 o'clock.
The Standards Committee, a bit like the Procedures Committee, is a committee that works in the undergrowth, or behind the scenes. Only occasionally are its issues debated in the chamber. I am therefore pleased that a Standards Committee issue, which relates to the way in which our democracy works, is being debated today.
Lots of people who were involved in the promotion of the Scottish Parliament were especially interested in two things. The first was the expansion of democracy, the way in which we can increase democracy in both breadth and depth to make it more accessible to people. The second was to increase transparency, both in the content of decisions and in the way in which they are made. Those underlying wishes have informed a lot of the Standards Committee's discussions of how to create a regulatory framework for cross- party groups.
The point that Patricia Ferguson made is worth bearing in mind. We are doing something quite differently from the way in which it is done elsewhere. The framework here is designed not to put cross-party groups at a distance from the Parliament—as happens, to some extent, south of the border—but to bind them into Parliament, so that the people who get involved in cross-party group activity can feel a definite link between what they do in the cross-party groups and the way in which the Parliament works.
In fact, it could be argued that cross-party groups create a third dimension of activity in the Parliament after the work that goes on in the chamber and in committees. Cross-party groups will allow people to contribute their own specialist expertise and knowledge in areas where they are interested enough to participate in the Parliament's work. The groups will be able to promote both specialist involvement in debate and the knowledge of MSPs so that we are better informed when discussing particular issues in the chamber or in committee. That would be a valuable way of binding people into the new democracy in Scotland and of improving the content of the democratic process.
In developing arguments for the regulation of cross-party groups, we wanted to ensure that appropriate safeguards were in place so that the groups were properly constituted when they were formed and were not the prey of specific interest groups acting inappropriately. Furthermore, groups needed to be subject to democratic procedures and defined in terms of a parliamentary purpose linked to the public interest. The regulations encapsulate all those principles and I am grateful that there is broad cross-party support for how we have achieved that.
Donald Gorrie's point about the time available for cross-party activity raises an issue for the Parliament. There is a narrowing of opportunity for MSPs to participate in such activity because so many of them commute to the Parliament and because such a range of possible activities is available only in the middle and at the end of days when Parliament is meeting. That is an issue that the Parliament, perhaps through the Procedures Committee, needs to consider.
We cannot confine the Parliament's work to official parliamentary sittings. There must be a mechanism that allows us to have a dialogue with people outside these formal settings who can contribute to our discussions. Cross-party groups can permit informal contact between parliamentarians and interest groups and people with interests in particular issues. By giving those groups a degree of legitimacy and access to the Parliament, we hope that they can be given time and the opportunity to involve parliamentarians effectively.
The range of cross-party groups will evolve. In time, new groups will be created and perhaps old groups formed around old issues will fall by the wayside. A very encouraging range of people want to become involved in this way in the working of the Parliament. By establishing a framework for cross-party groups early in the Parliament, we are encouraging and promoting such activity and participation, which can only be good for the Parliament.
The Standards Committee has done a good job in establishing this set of frameworks. However, as Iain Smith pointed out, we need to ensure that those frameworks are continually monitored and developed. The whole Parliament has a responsibility to take the opportunity presented by this set of regulations to be welcoming, encouraging and accessible and to ensure that this new form of participation in our democracy develops and flourishes.
The decision on this motion will come at 5 o'clock.