Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time
Room Allocation
1. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how it allocates room resources between MSP events and SPCB events. (S4O-02655)
There are approximately 380 events a year at the Scottish Parliament. Of those, approximately 340 are member-sponsored events with the remaining being sponsored by Scotland’s Futures Forum and the SPCB. SPCB events do not take precedence, but as major events can impact on a number of venues within the Parliament, they are agreed and planned up to a year in advance with resources allocated accordingly.
Most major events take place on Mondays and Fridays and occasionally, in the case of receptions, on a Wednesday evening. As such, they should have minimal impact on member-sponsored events. However, if a room that is booked for an SPCB event is needed for a member-sponsored event, parliamentary officials will work with members’ offices to try to find a suitable alternative room or date for their event.
I thank Liam McArthur for those helpful comments. His answer makes the point that the SPCB tries to keep out of the way of MSPs, but that is not how it feels. When we go looking for a room many months in advance, it is not unusual to be told that the SPCB has booked it for some reason or other.
I am conscious that Christine Grahame will also ask a question about rooms, but we seem to have had a number of substantial events—I do not want to criticise them—that seem to have taken place during term time when perhaps they could just as well have been held for the public’s benefit during holiday time, if I can put it that way. I wonder whether we might just reallocate our time.
I hear what Nigel Don says. Room reservations are made in advance for member-sponsored events so that if a member wishes to hold an event to engage with external organisations or members of the public, they are able to do so.
As I said earlier, we try to consider the larger-scale events a year in advance simply because of the logistical questions that need to be resolved. If Mr Don wishes to bring a specific case to the SPCB’s attention, we will be happy to look at it. However, as a general principle, we set great store by and value the openness and accessibility of the building and all members tend to subscribe to the notion that we need to safeguard that. The major events play their part in allowing a wide range of people from across Scotland access to the building and to members of the Scottish Parliament. If Nigel Don has specific concerns about his own attempts to hold events in the Parliament, we are more than happy to look at those.
Sustainable Travel
2. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what progress it has made on promoting sustainable travel and reducing reliance on aviation and the use of private cars. (S4O-02652)
As we say in our environmental policy, the SPCB is committed to promoting sustainable travel for business and commuting. We are also committed to reducing our carbon footprint by 42 per cent by 2020 and, by the end of March 2013, emissions had been reduced by 25 per cent.
Emissions from business travel have reduced by 21 per cent since 2005. Aviation emissions have reduced from a high of 280 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2010 to 131 tonnes during the last financial year.
By happy coincidence, I ask my question on the day on which Transform Scotland has published a report on the public sector’s sustainable transport practices, in which it finds a pretty poor performance overall. If the Scottish Parliament intends to show leadership on this issue within the wider public sector, is it really acceptable that every single committee visit to Brussels has used aviation as the default method of travel and has not even produced an environmental impact assessment considering rail as an option when Brussels is so easily reached by rail?
The member makes some good points. I am sure that he will understand that I do not have the Transform Scotland document, but it is worth reading and the corporate body could discuss the issue. The point is a constructive one, and we could of course always do better.
The SPCB strongly encourages staff not to fly to destinations that can be reached by other forms of transport in a reasonable timescale. In 2010, the SPCB conducted a travel-to-work survey, which revealed that 80 per cent of respondents travelled to work in a sustainable manner. As I said, we can always do better. I give Patrick Harvie my commitment that we will look at the document that he mentions and consider the areas in which we can improve our progress.
Exhibitions (Use of Committee Rooms)
3. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it plans to use committee rooms for exhibitions on a regular basis. (S4O-02656)
There are no current plans to use committee rooms on a regular basis for exhibitions.
I am delighted to hear that, because the key remit of the corporate body and its staff is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can operative effectively and that members can carry out their duties. However, recently, the Justice Committee was relegated to the chamber to take key evidence. I sat on the Labour benches, committee members sat where corporate body members are sitting now and the witnesses sat where Jackson Carlaw is sitting. We had great difficulty while a committee room was allocated for an exhibition. It appears to me that the key priority was the exhibition.
In case I am considered to be particularly grumpy or a spoilsport, I point out that it crossed my mind that the chamber would make an excellent venue for Cirque du Soleil—just a suggestion—and that that might even determine the safety of the beams.
It would never cross my mind to describe Christine Grahame as particularly grumpy.
I believe strongly that another remit of the Parliament is its openness and accessibility to the public. The exhibition that we are talking about was the Andy Warhol: pop, power and politics exhibition, which was announced in April this year. There are many reasons why it was held in committee room 1. As we were the first Parliament in the world to host the exhibition, we should be very proud of it. No committee meetings were cancelled because of the exhibition. More than 22,500 people visited it during the 30 days and more than 500 people participated in screen printing workshops, which I believe is a great triumph for the Parliament. My SPCB colleagues and I will stand by our belief that the exhibition was excellent and was a good example of our Parliament being accessible and encouraging to the public.
I agree that the exhibition was excellent, but that is not the question in point. The question in point is that the key priority is to allow MSPs to carry out their duties effectively. By deposing the Justice Committee from a committee room and placing us in the chamber, those priorities were changed. Frankly, I do not want it to happen again.
As I said, there are no current plans to use committee rooms on a regular basis. I repeat that no committee was prevented from meeting because of the exhibition. I would have thought that the chamber would be an excellent place to meet, as it reflects the importance of our committees.
Building Maintenance
4. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how much it has spent on cyclical and reactive building maintenance in each year since 2010. (S4O-02654)
I have the figures on that and I can certainly pass them to Mr Wilson after question time. We include cyclical maintenance in our planned maintenance figure, which was £1.52 million in 2012-13, the same in 2011-12 and £1.56 million in 2010-11. Reactive maintenance was £233,000 in 2010-11, £158,000 in 2011-12 and £179,000 in 2012-13.
I am almost tempted to ask when the koi carp will be installed in the water feature on the garden lobby roof—as we all know, there is a great deal of surface water lying on the roof at present. However, the question that I want to ask is, are any major works planned in the foreseeable future, similar to the security screening facility, which might require planning permission?
No. Nothing like that is planned. As has been reported to the Parliament already, the security screening facility is now complete and it came in on cost and on time. We are pleased by that. The facility is being seen as a welcome addition to our Parliament.
On-going, planned cyclical maintenance and reactive maintenance go on day to day, week to week and year to year. I do not have in front of me the plans for the next few years, but no major capital items that would require planning permission are planned at the moment.
Disabled Parking
5. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how many parking spaces for disabled people there are in the car park and whether their use is monitored. (S4O-02653)
The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body has six parking spaces for disabled people and those are booked and monitored through the facilities management help desk.
There is also of course a disabled parking space out on the street across the road from the Parliament entrance, which can be used by visitors.
As the member might know, I am taking forward a member’s bill on the blue badge scheme. I hope that this Parliament can be an exemplar in terms of ensuring that disabled parking spaces are used only by appropriate blue badge holders. I request that the use of the spaces continues to be monitored so that we can be such an exemplar.
Dennis Robertson is quite right: we would like this Parliament to be an exemplar.
A recent example is that one of our members was hosting a group that had quite a few disabled persons in it and we were able to arrange for them to use the spaces in the Parliament car park.
If the six disabled persons parking bays in the car park are not booked by noon, they are sometimes released for general booking for the following day. I stress that that is, and will continue to be, monitored very carefully.
This is such an important issue and Dennis Robertson is right to bring it up, especially in the light of his member’s bill. We should always be held as an example.