Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Official Report 682KB pdf

---

Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time

The next item of business is Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body question time.

---

Scottish Parliament Building (Police Incidents)

1. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how many incidents requiring action by the police have occurred in the Parliament since 2003. (S4O-00234)

The number of recorded crimes at the Parliament building since 2003 to date is 158. The numbers were substantially higher during the period when the site was under construction in 2003 and part of 2004. Not all incidents requiring action by the police are recorded as crimes. Information about the number of incidents is recorded separately. A new recording system was introduced in November 2007 and to date 298 incidents specific to the Parliament postcode have been recorded. Lothian and Borders Police has advised that it is time and cost prohibitive to produce data that is prior to 2007.

In April 2009, the Parliament police unit started to maintain records of items surrendered to the police at the public entrance. To date, 368 various items have been surrendered by visitors to the building. Surrendered items that have not been returned to owners from April this year include 126 items that are mainly illegal knives and blades. Surrendered items are not recorded as incidents or crimes.

I am interested in the number of incidents that involved the carrying of knives. Various newspaper reports have stated that stab vests have been issued to staff members. I appreciate the duty of care that the SPCB has towards staff, but how many stab vests have been procured, who will use them and where will they be used?

I thank the member for his interest in security in the building. As the member will know, the nature of the terrorist threat facing the Parliament has changed in recent years and there is increased concern about the threat from fixated individuals. On the numbers of vests, following a procurement exercise one vest has been supplied for each member of the security staff. The total cost to date is £35,500. Security vests are worn at the public entrance and the car park. I stress that all training has been carried out and that the staff trade unions fully support the move, because the SPCB has a duty of care for all its members of staff.

---

Living Wage

2. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how many of its staff, including those employed through agencies, are paid less than the living wage of £7.20 an hour. (S4O-00235)

I know that the member has a great interest in this particular area. All directly employed corporate body employees and agency-recruited staff employed on a temporary basis are paid above the living wage. In the case of contractors, such as Sodexo, it is their responsibility to set the terms and conditions of their own staff, with the caveat that in both cleaning and catering contracts we have specified that wages must be at least at the minimum wage level.

I appreciate that there is an issue to do with contractors, especially Sodexo. Is it possible for the Parliament to consider becoming a living wage employer, so that in future even Sodexo staff get the living wage?

The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body is not signed up with the living wage foundation as an accredited living wage employer. The member makes a convincing case for why we should be signed up. I undertake to raise the matter at the corporate body’s next meeting.

I will request that, in future, the corporate body costs a living wage option prior to the award of new contracts. As far as current contracts are concerned, there is a yearly review of the costs of wages for each contract that we have.

I seek clarification on the member’s comment that there is an expectation that Sodexo pays the minimum wage. Does Sodexo pay the minimum wage or not?

In the terms of the contract we make it clear that the minimum wage must be paid. Because of commercial confidentiality we do not know the wages of individual members of the contract. However, I stress that the contract terms for cleaning and catering specify that the minimum wage must be paid.

---

Procurement (Contract Staff Terms and Conditions)

3. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how its procurement processes safeguard the terms and conditions of its contract staff. (S4O-00236)

The terms and conditions of contract staff are determined by the contract of employment between the relevant contractor and its staff. However, the SPCB requires all our contractors to meet the obligations that are set out in our contract conditions. The contract conditions include equalities, health and safety and all statutory and other legal obligations. There is also a requirement that contract staff follow our guidance and procedures when they are working at the Parliament. In addition, we ensure that all our service contracts contain an appropriate and robust Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations—TUPE—clause.

I am grateful to the corporate body for its answer and for its response to Kezia Dugdale on the living wage. I have heard that there are contract staff in the Parliament who are not paid sick pay. That is extremely concerning to me and I am sure that it concerns the corporate body. Does the corporate body know how widespread such problems are among contract staff? Are there plans to review how contracts are drawn up in future?

I am not aware of problems to do with sick pay, but I think that I speak on behalf of the corporate body when I say that if such instances were to arise we would certainly look to investigate them as a matter of urgency. As David Stewart said, the corporate body is minded to consider living wage provisions at its next meeting. I understand that currently 75 per cent of employees contracted to the Parliament are covered by the living wage and those that are not are within 5 per cent of it. Nevertheless, it is important that we take the issue on and reflect on what members have said. If Drew Smith wants to contact me about specific cases in relation to his point about sick pay, I will undertake to get them reviewed as a matter of urgency.

Can I persuade the member that there is a case for a much wider-ranging review of the Parliament’s procurement processes, in relation to a wide range of ethical criteria? Sick pay and the provision of the living wage are good examples; another criterion would be tax compliance. Is the member aware that we procure printers from Hewlett-Packard and catering from Sodexo, which are corporations that indulge in scandalous tax avoidance practices? Should not such issues feature in our procurement policies?

Patrick Harvie raises legitimate issues. I would have no objection to broadening the scope of the review to which David Stewart referred, to include other issues, although I make no comment on allegations about corporations that are contracted at the moment. If we are to undertake a review, it makes sense to encompass a wider range of issues, if that is appropriate, rather than address matters in a piecemeal fashion.

---

MSP Staff (Bicycle Loans)

4. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether, in order to promote cycling, it facilitates loans for MSP staff wishing to purchase bicycles, which are deducted from their salaries. (S4O-00237)

The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body does not directly offer loans to MSP staff who wish to purchase bicycles, but it will assist members to provide interest-free salary advances to their staff for such a purchase. A member can authorise a salary advance to a member of their staff, which is paid from the expenses scheme in one month and reclaimed from the salary over the next 11 months.

I thank the SPCB for that very helpful answer. I have asked the same question before, but that was a much more positive answer than I have received previously. My information tells me that such a scheme can save the employee and the employer sums of money with regard to national insurance and taxation.

Helen Eadie alludes to the very useful United Kingdom Government cycle-to-work salary sacrifice scheme. The SPCB does not currently operate that scheme, but it offers interest-free salary advances for its own staff and will assist MSPs to do the same for their staff.

The SPCB is exploring whether it should consider implementing the salary sacrifice scheme. I do not know whether MSPs would be able to avail themselves of that as employers, but I will ask the SPCB staff who are considering the issue to ask that question.

That concludes questions to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body.

14:46 Meeting suspended.

14:50 On resuming—