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 22 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2256 contributions

|

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

Good morning to both Johns. Thank you for joining us. Continuing on similar themes, I suspect, I want to explore a little more the culture of the legal fraternity in such inquiries. Of course, one makes the assumption that all lawyers operate from complete integrity and ethics. That is one view: that they provide good works. The other view, potentially, is that inquiries are a racket whereby certain law firms and lawyers have found a very good way of making money. Particularly if they build up a reputation, they can roll from public inquiry to public inquiry. I know that that sounds contentious, but I want to explore your understanding of the tension between those two positions, because there is clearly at least a possibility that such a situation may occur.

What is your thinking on that? Critically, is the legal profession able to look at itself and say, “This isn’t a great look,” if there is even a sense that that might be the case?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

However, you recognise my point that that could occur—that, where there is no proper financial governance as we would understand it, it is in the interest of lawyers, or some lawyers, to prolong an inquiry because there is a direct correlation with more billable hours for them, to put it simply. Indeed, many law firms reward their lawyers according to the number of billable hours that they put through on a particular—

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

I have a final question on costs. John Campbell, the convener has already asked you about this. You said in your submission that you do not see that it is necessary to publish individuals’ costs, and I understand the sensitivity around that. However, if you were looking to effect change, although there might be some initial pain if somebody’s costs are put in the public domain, that would very swiftly change behaviours. I am interested in your thoughts.

In all of these cases, if I were coming in to consult, I would ask what you could do to immediately make a difference and to start to shift the culture. Publishing that information seems to be one thing that could be done. Tell me a really good reason why, if we are starting to get a proper focus on costs and not just allowing for massive cost overruns, we would not actively seek to put the cost of everybody involved in a public inquiry in the public domain, in exactly the same way as our salaries go into the public domain and we must declare everything.

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

That speaks to a cultural issue, does it not, John Sturrock?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

That leads back to the Government.

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

On that note, and picking up a point that the convener has made, there are surely two bare minimums. By way of disclosure, I note that, in one of my multiple previous lives, I ran large-scale so-called transformational change programmes for corporates. As programme manager, I would collate the terms of reference and the structure. I would head the programme and multiple project managers would report to me, while a project management office would deal with the gubbins. We would have a change control process and a clear established budget. There is no way that a project with a budget of even £500,000 would not have a proper, clear governance structure to manage costs, but that is contrary to what we are talking about.

To flesh out the idea, I note that that is one route, but there will be others. We need to know to what extent lawyers understand that they are not equipped to do that sort of thing—in fairness, they need not be, as that is not their role. They bring expertise in the law and huge capacity for attention to detail. Is that generally recognised or is there a tension in that, if that tidiness is not already in place, it may suit some law firms because, ultimately, it will result in increased billable hours and, therefore, profit?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

I think that you maketh my point.

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

In either of those instances, did the communication include questions about the cost and the on-going governance?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

I would dispute that, as a politician, but do carry on.

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 17 June 2025

Michelle Thomson

Do you want to comment on that, Mr Campbell?