This search includes all content on the Scottish Parliament website, except for Votes and Motions. All Official Reports (what has been said in Parliament) and Questions and Answers are available from 1999. You can refine your search by adding and removing filters.
They are perfectly acceptable. However, on a point of clarification about the terminology, are we talking about the draft report that is circulated to the committee?
However, it is important that we make the point that leaks of this nature are unacceptable, that they bring the committee and the Parliament as a whole into disrepute and that we should not conduct ourselves in that way.
Those problems clearly have an effect on sustainability issues within our communities.On the member's second point, about attracting professionals, it is clear that the work of the fresh talent initiative and the Grampian NHS trusts is vital.
We will also take account of the numbers travelling to see if that makes a difference to the cost. I support Susan Deacon's point. Our priority should be first to visit Wales and secondly to visit the Public Accounts Committee at Westminster.
It appears that the policy is to bring people back into the centre of Edinburgh, which seems perverse. That is a point that we ought to make in representations to the Scottish Executive.
We are therefore cautious as far as testing is concerned.As for the proportion of the FSAS budget that is geared towards this problem, I point out that our concerns must be recognised.
If we continue to receive reports from the Subordinate Legislation Committee that say that instruments are defectively drafted, we would be in dereliction of our duty if we did not choose that option. I make that point with the utmost generosity and kindness towards our witnesses.