Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 27 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2256 contributions

|

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Framework Legislation and Henry VIII Powers

Meeting date: 24 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

In some respects, the gentle challenge is, does it really matter? Many of the considerations that we are covering off today are about the efficiency and effectiveness of that type of legislation. Therefore, surely we should be equally concerned if there are just a few pieces of framework legislation; we should not just be concerned about the number of them.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Framework Legislation and Henry VIII Powers

Meeting date: 24 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

[Made a request to intervene.]

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Framework Legislation and Henry VIII Powers

Meeting date: 24 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

I completely agree. In my further remarks, I was going to pay respect to the Scottish Government for responding to the Finance and Public Administration Committee and addressing our concerns, so I happily agree with that.

As someone with considerable experience in assessing business cases, estimates of costs for larger programmes and so on, I am concerned when considering this from a technical perspective. We know that financial memorandums include educated guesses, but the point that I made to Lorna Slater earlier is that range is an important indicator of how tight the scoping of the policy is. Generally speaking, a massive range of costs from X to Y tells us something about how tightly scoped the policy work has been, and that raises a concern. Going back to my point about efficiency and effectiveness, if, under challenge, in front of the committee, the member or the minister is able to clearly articulate the basis of every measure, that gives us confidence. In fairness to all the ministers and members, where they have not been able to do that, that illustrates my concern.

A point that has been made by a number of members is that, even with good scrutiny up front, we have an issue with secondary legislation when we look at it through a purely financial spend lens against the backdrop of a shortage of public sector money. One key question—I do not know whether this has been mentioned enough—is how on earth we are meant to carry out post-legislative scrutiny, especially from a financial perspective, when we are using a framework bill with absolutely massive ranges, considerable uncertainty and considerable complexity. I do not see how that can be done. We need to own up to that fact and be aware of it.

I will finish quickly, because I made a lot of my points during my interventions on everybody.

I completely agree with the committee’s view that

“powers allowing flexibility ‘just in case’ are unlikely to meet the test for the necessity of the power”.

I also completely agree with its point that

“consultation and ‘co-design’ on a Bill’s provisions should take place”

up front.

Its last point is that,

“as a general rule, a lack of policy development is not an appropriate justification for introducing framework legislation”.

I suspect that the minister would want to intervene on that point if I was not running out of time. I am not saying that that is being done, but I am saying that there is the potential for that to occur, and we need to be alive to that.

16:19  

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 23 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

To be clear, I am not seeking to have a pop at any of you; I am trying to understand how you see the skills system as currently structured in your industry and whether it positively encourages women. It is more of a generic question.

I see that Stevie Wilson wants to come in.

10:30  

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 23 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

I have one more question that I will roll in. This morning, we have all mentioned the rapid change driven by net zero and artificial intelligence. I would appreciate your reflections on what flexibility needs to be built into the system so that we are poised and ready. I appreciate that that is a massive area.

Doug, perhaps you can answer that and pick up on the earlier point.

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 23 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

Good morning, and thank you for joining us. I want to pick up a thread that, I think, Tony Burns started on when he talked about underrepresented groups. In your industries, how can you target girls and women? What are your reflections on the skills system for them? If we are bringing in a the pairts, obviously, some of your industries tend to be male dominated, so I would appreciate your thoughts and reflections on that.

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 23 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

What about you, Jennifer? Obviously, I appreciate that this is sometimes a function of scale.

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 23 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

Thank you very much.

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 23 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

I will move on to something that has not come up yet. To what extent are the views of industry fairly reflected in shaping the policy and provision? It is good that you are here this morning, but I am talking about apart from that.

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Budget Process in Practice

Meeting date: 22 April 2025

Michelle Thomson

Thank you very much for your submissions. You have given us so much evidence. I also very much appreciate your frankness, which I think will help us to move things along—although that will be subject to the Government having an appetite for change.

That leads me to my first question. To what extent do you think that the Government really has an appetite for doing this better? I do not mind who goes first. You are smiling, Professor Bell, so you can go first.