SPPA/S3/07/4/A STANDARDS, PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC ...

SPPA/S3/07/4/A

STANDARDS, PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE

AGENDA

4th Meeting, 2007 (Session 3)

Tuesday 11 December 2007

The Committee will meet at 2.15 pm in Committee Room 5.

1. Cross-Party Groups (Standards): The Committee will consider applications for recognition from four proposed Cross-Party Groups.

2. Elections to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (Procedures): The Committee will consider a note by the Clerks.

3. Review of equalities in the work of Committees (Procedures): The Committee will consider a note by the Clerks.

4. Decision on taking business in private: The Committee will decide whether to consider the following items in private: item 5 on its work programme, item 6 on a request from the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, and a draft report on elections to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body at future meetings.

5. Work programme: The Committee will consider its work programme, taking account of the resolution passed by Parliament on the budget process on 8 November 2007.

6. Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner (Standards): The Committee will consider a request for a direction from the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner.

Peter McGrath Clerk to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Room TG.01 Ext 85239

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

SPPA/S3/07/4/A

The papers for this meeting are as follows: Agenda Item 1 Note by the Clerks on Cross-Party Group Applications SPPA/S3/07/4/1 Agenda Item 2 Note by the Clerks on SPCB Elections SPPA/S3/07/4/2 Agenda Item 3 Note by the Clerks on equalities in the work of Committees SPPA/S3/07/4/3 Agenda Item 5 Note by the Clerks on the work programme SPPA/S3/07/4/4 Agenda Item 6 Note by the Clerks on a request from the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner

SPPA/S3/07/4/5

SPPA/S3/07/4/1


4th Meeting, Session 3


Cross-Party Group Applications

Note by the Clerks

Introduction 1. In accordance with the provisions on Cross-Party Groups set out in Section 6 of the Code of Conduct, proposals for the establishment of Cross-Party Groups (CPGs) in the Scottish Parliament must be submitted to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee for its approval. Proposed CPG on Sexual Health 2. This proposed CPG was active in Session 2 but re-registration documentation was not received within the 90 day re-registration period set out in Rule 16 of section 6.3. The proposed Group complies with the MSP membership requirements set out in the Code of Conduct and there are no significant changes to the purpose of the Group since it was accorded recognition by the previous Committee. 3. The registration form submitted by this Group is attached to this paper as annexe A. Proposed CPG on Learning Disability 4. This proposed CPG was active in Session 2 but re-registration documentation was not received within the 90 day re-registration period set out in Rule 16 of section 6.3. The proposed Group complies with the MSP membership requirements set out in the Code of Conduct and there are no significant changes to the purpose of the Group since it was accorded recognition by the previous Committee. 5. The registration form submitted by this Group is attached to this paper as annexe B. Proposed CPG on Palestine 6. This proposed CPG was active in Session 2 but re-registration documentation was not received within the 90 day re-registration set out in Rule 16 of section 6.3. The registration form and accompanying information submitted by the proposed CPG is attached as annexe C to this note. 7. While there are no significant changes to the Group’s purpose, members may wish to seek clarification as to the purpose of the subscription fee that it is proposed to charge Group members.

Membership and Office Bearers 8. The proposed CPG has requested a waiver of the requirement of rule 2 of section 6.3 of the Code of Conduct. Rule 2 requires that a CPG has a minimum of 5 MSP members and that of these at least one member must be from each of the parties or groups represented on the Parliamentary Bureau. The Committee will note the proposed Group does not currently meet this rule. 9. The MSP membership (by party) of the proposed CPG is as follows:

• 1 Independent • 1 Scottish Green Party • 10 Scottish Labour Party • 1 Scottish Liberal Democrat • 3 Scottish National Party.

10. The Committee may wish to consider the note attached to the proposed group’s application outlining the background to efforts made in relation to ensuring representation from each party represented on the Bureau, and asking for the rule to be waived in this instance. An exemption on these grounds was sought, and subsequently granted by the previous Committee. 11. The Group meets the requirement of rule 2 in relation to office bearers. Pauline McNeill MSP is Convener and Robin Harper MSP and Margo MacDonald MSP are Vice-Conveners. Proposed CPG on Visual Impairment 12. This proposed CPG was active in Session 2 but re-registration documentation was not received within the 90 day re-registration period set out in Rule 16 of section 6.3. The proposed Group complies with the MSP membership requirements set out in the Code of Conduct and there are no significant changes to the purpose of the Group since it was accorded recognition by the previous Committee. 13. The registration form and accompanying information submitted by the proposed CPG is attached as annexe D to this note. 14. The MSP membership (by party) of the proposed CPG is as follows:

• 1 Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party • 4 Scottish Labour Party • 1 Scottish Liberal Democrat • 1 Scottish National Party

Subscription and Financial Benefits 15. The proposed Group has declared £4000 in section 5 of the registration document which is applicable under section 6.4.6 of the Code. The Committee may wish to seek clarity on this entry.

16. The registration form indicates that the proposed Group is in receipt of financial benefit in the form of a £4000 donation made to RNIB Scotland by Lilly UK (Scotland). This donation was made to assist with the running of the proposed Cross-Party Group. The costs that are anticipated by the Group include provision of catering and administration (including posting of agendas and production of reports). The form also indicates that the costs to be met cover the specific needs of blind and partially sighted members of the Group. 17. The Committee way wish to consider seeking further information in relation to these financial benefits. Recommendation 18. The Committee is invited to consider whether to accord recognition to the following proposed Cross-Party Groups in the Scottish Parliament:

• Sexual Health • Learning Disability • Palestine • Visual Impairment.

ANNEXE A

CROSS-PARTY GROUPS IN THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT

REGISTRATION FORM

1. GROUP NAME Code of Conduct 6.2.2

Groups that have undertaken to comply with the rules on Cross-Party Groups may use the words Cross-Party Group in the Scottish Parliament in their title.

Cross-Party Group in the Scottish Parliament on Sexual Health

2. GROUP PURPOSE Code of Conduct 6.2.4 and 6.3, Rule 1

A brief statement of the main purpose of the group. Groups are reminded that the Standards Committee will look very carefully at the proposed purpose of a group to satisfy itself that its purpose is Parliamentary in nature and of genuine public interest.

1 To raise awareness and to promote a broad understanding of sexual health

issues, both in the Scottish Parliament and elsewhere. 2 To provide a forum for discussion of ideas and new developments in the field

of sexual health, and share information and expertise. 3 To explore and research developments in sexual health policy and practice.

3. GROUP MEMBERS Code of Conduct 6.3, Rules 2, 3, 8, 9 & 10

When listing members, who are MSPs, only the MSP’s name need be given. For members from outwith the Parliament, the name of the member and any employer they represent must be given.

MSPs Non-MSP Individuals Susan Deacon Ann Henderson Tim Street Joan Robertson Sinead Cook Pam Duncan

Organisations

Patrick Harvie Margaret Smith Jamie Hepburn Elaine Smith Kenneth Gibson Robin Harper Mary Scanlon Marlyn Glen

Abortion Rights Association British Pharmaceutical Industry BASHH Bayer Schering Pharma ChildLine Scotland British Asso of Sexual & Relationship Therapy British Medical Association Caledonia Youth Centre for Research Families & Relationships Church of Scotland HIV/AIDS Project

Edinburgh & West Lothian GUM fpa Health Protection Scotland Health Scotland Healthy City Partnership, Teenage Pregnancy Healthy Respect HIV Scotland LANDED Peer Education Service LGBT Youth Scotland Mellow Yellow Information Services Morhamburn MRC Human Reproductive Sciences Unit NHS Ayrshire & Arran NHS Borders NHS Dumfries and Galloway NHS Forth Valley NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Lanarkshire Open Road Project NHS Lothian & FFPRHC Scottish Committee NHS Tayside Organon Laboratories Pasante Healthcare Relate Scotland Royal College Obstetricians & Gynaecologists Royal Pharmaceutical Society Russell Institute Sandyford Initiative SCOT-PEP Scottish Committee of the Faculty of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Scottish Prison Services, Health Protection Scottish Prof Nursing Network Sexual Health Scottish Sexual & Women’s Health Industry Group Scottish Women Against Pornography Scottish Women’s Aid Scottish Women's Convention SHIVAG Talk 2 Terrence Higgins Trust Scotland University of Paisley, Nursing and Midwifery Waverley Care Women’s Abortion Rights Scotland Zero Tolerance Trust

4. GROUP OFFICERS Code of Conduct 6.3, Rule 4

Please amend titles as necessary e.g. to indicate joint office holders, or preferred titles.

Co-Conveners Patrick Harvie MSP, Margaret Smith MSP, Jamie Hepburn MSP

Vice-Convener

Secretary Terrence Higgins Trust Scotland

Treasurer Terrence Higgins Trust Scotland

5. FINANCIAL OR OTHER BENEFITS RECEIVED Code of Conduct 6.4.6

The group must register any financial or other material benefit received by the group from whatever source, where the value of the financial sum or benefit from any single source exceeds £250 in any one calendar year. This includes donations, sponsorship, subscriptions, hospitality, gifts, visits, provision of services or accommodation or staff assistance. The value of use of Parliamentary facilities need not be registered.

The details requiring to be registered include a brief description of the benefit, the approximate monetary value, the date on which it was received and the source from which it came. Where a consultancy organisation provides benefits, the client on whose behalf these are provided should be named.

Date Amount Description

6. GROUP SUBSCRIPTION Code of Conduct 6.3, Rule 7

Where a group charges or proposes to charge a subscription, this must be reasonable and the same for all members. The amount of the subscription should be registered and the purposes for which it is intended to use the subscription.

Amount per group member per year £10 for administration and meeting arrangements

7. GROUP STAFF AS PARLIAMENTARY PASS HOLDERS

If a group makes use of staff issued with a Parliamentary pass, any paid activity undertaken by those staff where the employer benefits from the pass holder’s access to the Parliament must be registered. There is no need to state the amount of remuneration. The requirement relates both to staff employed directly by the group and to staff employed by an outside organisation to provide assistance to the group.

Staff name

Title of post

Name and address of employer organisation

Type of employer organisation

8. GROUP CONTACT Code of Conduct 6.4.4 and 6.5.1 – 6.5.5

Please give the full details of an elected official of the group who is an MSP who will be the contact for registration matters for the group. Initially this must be the Member who signs the declaration on compliance with the rules on behalf of the group. If a group subsequently changes the designated contact, the office of the Standards Clerk must be informed within 7 days of the change.

Name Patrick Harvie MSP

Parliamentary address

Telephone number 0131 348 6363

Constituency Office telephone number 0141 946 5869

ANNEXE B


REGISTRATION FORM



Cross-Party Group in the Scottish Parliament for Learning Disability



The group aims to ensure that the needs and aspirations of people with learning disabilities are considered by the Scottish Parliament and by public policy makers.



MSPs Non-MSP Individuals

Organisations

Jackie Baillie MSP Gavin Brown MSP Trish Godman MSP Robin Harper MSP Johann Lamont MSP Christina McKelvie MSP Hugh O’Donnell MSP

Action Group ARC Scotland Cornerstone Downs Syndrome Scotland ENABLE Scotland Fife Council Gowrie Care Limited Hillcrest Key Housing Mental Welfare Commission PAMIS People First Quarriers RNIB Scotland SCLD Values Into Action Scotland



Convener Jackie Baillie MSP

Vice-Convener Robin Harper MSP

Secretary Mike Holmes

Treasurer







Amount per group member per year



Staff name

Title of post





Name Jackie Baillie MSP

Parliamentary address The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP



ANNEXE C


REGISTRATION FORM



Cross-Party Group in the Scottish Parliament on Palestine



To establish a link between Palestinians working, living or studying in Scotland, and civic Scotland – and to provide a forum for discussion on issues facing the Palestinian people in general and the Palestinian National Authority in particular.



MSPs Non-MSP Individuals Jackie Baillie Karen Gillon Sarah Boyack Frank McAveety Marlyn Glen Elaine Smith Bashir Ahmad Sandra White Hugh O’Donnell Malcolm Chisholm Bill Butler Margo MacDonald Patricia Ferguson Robin Harper Bill Wilson Richard Simpson

Tony Grahame Jane Grahame Nadir Yousef Graham Watt Humza Yousaf Janet Powney Robert Philip Dr Runa Mackay Alicia Ludwig Jim Slaven Vanessa Fuertes Catherine Watson ME Elizabeth Smith Nancy Adams RH Drummond Kathleen Gibb Mick Mooney James Matheson Anita Shanley Anne Alden Jock McDougall Hala George

Anna Sardesai

Organisations

Sophia Macleod – SPSC Caroline Evens – YWCA Scotland Councillor Jahangir Hanif – Glasgow CC Colin Morton – Palcrafts/Hadell Carole Morton – Palcrafts/Hadell Pat Bryden – Women in Black/Edinburgh Peace and Justice Centre David Hewitt – Pilton Community Health Project Liz Sim – United Nations Association Joyce Carmichael – Glasgow PSC Cate Mowet – The Antonine Friendship Link



Convener Pauline McNeill MSP

Vice-Convener Robin Harper MSP, Margo MacDonald MSP

Secretary Tony Grahame

Treasurer Colin Morton







Amount per group member per year £1.00



Staff name

Title of post





Name Pauline McNeill MSP

Parliamentary address MG.07 The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP



ANNEXE D


REGISTRATION FORM



Cross-Party Group in the Scottish Parliament on Visual Impairment



There are an estimated 200,000 people in Scotland with significant sight loss. The typical profile of a blind person in Scotland is a woman in her 70s who lives alone, has no contact with social services, is three times more likely than a sighted person her age to be living on the margins of poverty, and who has not left her home in the last week, not even to go into the garden.

The main purpose of the proposed cross-party group is to advise MSPs and the Scottish Government on issues of concern to blind and partially sighted people, across devolved matters. It is hoped that these representations will result in more sensitive and effective legislation and policy development. It is also intended that the non-MSP members of the CPG will be able to assist Members to address the needs of the blind and partially sighted constituents.

A cross-party group on visual impairment was active and effective during the two previous Scottish parliamentary terms, benefiting from widespread MSP support, and the involvement of professional and voluntary organisations across Scotland.

MSPs Non-MSP Individuals

Organisations

Robert Brown Stuart McMillan Karen Gillon Nanette Milne Richard Simpson Jack McConnell James Kelly

RNIB Scotland Guide Dogs Scottish National Federation for the Welfare of the Blind Optometry Scotland Visual Impairment Ayrshire Perth and Kinross Society for the

Blind Highland Society for the Blind Grampian Society for the Blind RNIB Edinburgh and the Lothians Glasgow and West of Scotland Society for the Blind Macular Disease Society Visualise Visual Impairment Scotland



Convener Robert Brown MSP

Vice-Convener Stuart McMillan MSP Nanette Milne MSP Karen Gillon MSP

Secretary James Adams, Parliamentary Manager, RNIB Scotland, Dunedin House, 25 Ravelston Terrace, Edinburgh. EH4 3TP. Tel no: 0131 311 8500.





4 January 2007 £4000 RNIB Scotland received a donation on 4th January 2007 to assist with the running of the cross party group from Lilly UK (Scotland), 97b West Bow, Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH1 2JP. The donation runs up to the end of this financial year. We do not know at this point if this will be renewed. If it is, or any further donations are received we will notify the Committee.

The costs we anticipate for the running of the cross party group are common to other cross party groups - catering, administration (posting of agenda's, production of reports etc) but also costing relevant to our particular client group. We have a large number of blind and partially sighted members who have specific needs which RNIB Scotland provides on a case by case basis.



Amount per group member per year Nil



Staff name None.

Title of post





Name Robert Brown MSP

Parliamentary address M3.02 The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP



SPPA/S3/07/4/2




Elections to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body

Note by the Clerks

Background and issues 1. At its meeting on 30 October, the Committee agreed to seek views on a potential change to Rule 3.7 to provide for a longer period for elections to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) following a general election, in order to avoid difficulties in circumstances where these elections might precede that of the First Minister. 2. In order for the Parliament to provide the resources necessary for it to operate, it is important for the elections to the Corporate Body to be in place as soon as possible after a general election. The deadline for these elections is currently 10 sitting days after a general election (Rule 3.7). Section 46 of the Scotland Act 1998 provides that a First Minster must be nominated by the Parliament within 28 days from the date of a general election. The SPCB appointed in the previous session continues in office until the election of its successor body. 3. Experience following previous general elections demonstrates that the current timeframe for the SPCB election can be problematic in instances where there is a delay in the formation of a government: as was the case in 2003 and 2007 when it took longer than 10 sitting days for a government to be formed following the elections. This could have meant that the SPCB election preceded the selection of the First Minister, potentially causing parties difficulties in establishing their ministerial and shadow ministerial teams. 4. In order to prevent any difficulties from arising, the approach taken in the past has been for the outgoing Presiding Officer to set a restricted number of sitting days in the first few weeks of the new session to ensure that the 10 sitting day period continues beyond the nomination of a First Minister. The most obvious effect of closing the office of the Clerk (so that certain days are not designated sitting days) is that members cannot lodge motions and questions on these days. 5. The Committee agreed to inquire into the matter and seek the views of SPCB, the Minister for Parliamentary Business, Business Managers and the Chief Executive.

Views of consultees 6. Three responses have been received to the Committee’s consultation (reproduced at Annexe 1). The responses indicate general support for the introduction of measures to allow for greater flexibility in relation to SPCB elections, although one respondent is not certain that there is any necessity for the election of the First Minister to precede those of the SPCB. The Parliament’s Chief Executive points out that: “While the previous procedural solution has worked, the Presiding Officers share my view that it would be neater to extend the deadline for SPCB elections to 20 sitting days. That would be more consistent with the statutory deadline of 28 calendar days for the selection of a First Minister and allow the Office of the Clerk to be open on days when members would expect it to be so”. Recommendation 7. The Committee is asked:

(a) to consider extending the timescale for elections to the SPCB following a general election, and, if agreed, what the revised time period should be; and

(b) if agreed, to consider a draft report at the Committee’s next meeting.

ANNEXE 1 LETTER FROM CONVENER TO CONSULTEES (SPCB, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, MINISTER FOR PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS AND BUSINESS MANAGERS) At its meeting on 30 October 2007, the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee considered the issue of a potential change to rule 3.7 of Standing Orders in relation to the timeframe for elections to the SPCB following a general election. This is in the context of the procedural issues encountered earlier this year when, as you will be aware, provisions had to be made to allow the election of the First Minister to precede the SPCB election. The note considered by the Committee at its meeting is enclosed for information. The Committee would welcome your views on the practicalities of extending the timeframe and any suggested alternative timeframes, for example 20 sitting days rather than the 10 sitting days currently provided. In order to allow the Committee to consider this issue at its meeting on 11 December, it would be helpful if any comments could be provided by Friday 23 November. Keith Brown MSP Convener 7 November 2007 RESPONSE FROM LIBERAL DEMOCRAT BUSINESS MANAGER I refer to your Convener's letter of 7th November 2007 regarding elections to the SPCB. Whilst I am not sure that there is any necessity for the First Minister election to precede those to the SPCB, I have no objection to greater flexibility such as is suggested in Keith Brown's letter which would allow for a variety of circumstances. Robert Brown MSP 21 November 2007 RESPONSE FROM MINISTER FOR PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS Thank you for your letter of 7 November seeking my views on extending the current 10 sitting days timeframe in rule 3.7 for elections to the SPCB following a general election. The Scottish Government's interest in this issue is twofold. First, we are interested in the orderly working of the provisions of the Scotland Act, and the resulting secondary legislation and Standing Orders. Second, we are concerned that a Government can be formed properly after an election without other matters potentially causing difficulties. Paragraph 1.3 of paper SPPA/S3/07/2/2 notes that both of these aspects of our interests have been affected by the current rules, and there have been instances when

the 10 day timeframe has had to be artificially managed by closing the office of the Clerk. This clearly is not an ideal situation and the Scottish Government supports the Committee's attempt to resolve this issue. The Scottish Government has no strong views on what would constitute an adequate timeframe. Any solution must meet the problem identified, and provide flexibility. The Government would be interested in the views of others based on their experience. Bruce Crawford MSP 26 November 2007 RESPONSE FROM CHIEF EXECUTIVE Thank you for your letter of 7 November in relation to rule 3.7 of Standing Orders. I have discussed your letter with the Presiding Officers and am also responding on their behalf. The SPCB is obliged under section 21 of the Scotland Act to provide the parliament with the property, staff and services required for the parliament's purposes. It is therefore important that the parliament is able to elect a new Corporate Body as soon as possible after a general election. Hence we currently have a 10 sitting days deadline for SPCB elections as set out in Standing Orders. That said, the election of a First Minister and government takes precedence over SPCB elections and this process usually takes longer than 10 sitting days. This has necessitated the outgoing Presiding Officer setting a restricted amount of sitting days in the first 3 weeks of the new session to ensure compliance with Standing Order 3.7. While the previous procedural solution has worked, the Presiding Officers share my view that it would be neater to extend the deadline for SPCB elections to 20 sitting days. That would be more consistent with the statutory deadline of 28 calendar days for the selection of a First Minister and allow the Office of the Clerk to be open on days when Members would expect it to be so. I would, of course, be happy to answer any more questions from your Committee on this issue. Paul Grice 29 November 2007

SPPA/S3/07/4/3




Mainstreaming equalities in the work of Committees

Note by the Clerks

Background 1. At the end of Session 2, the then Procedures Committee considered a proposal from the Equal Opportunities Committee, endorsed by the Conveners Group, that the Equal Opportunities Committee should co-ordinate a review at the end of each session of the work carried out by committees in relation to equalities, and that Standing Orders should provide for such a review. A copy of the letter from the former Convener of the Equal Opportunities Committee, along with the paper considered by the then Conveners Group, is attached. 2. The Procedures Committee expressed its support for the principle of mainstreaming and for the idea of a requirement for committees to audit the equal opportunities aspects of their work, but felt that detailed consideration of the proposal would be better undertaken at the beginning of a new session. Accordingly, that Committee agreed to recommend that its successor committee might consider the proposal further in the next Parliamentary session. At its meeting on 30 October 2007, the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee agreed that the review should be considered as part of its work programme. Proposed review process 3. The key focus of each equalities review would be to highlight how equalities considerations have been taken into account from the development stage of a committee’s work. While it is recognised that there will not be a completely uniform approach by committees in view of the difference, for example, between subject and mandatory committees, it was felt that there should be an agreed set of headings, such as legislation, inquiries and general procedures. 4. The Session 2 Equal Opportunities Committee felt that the production of a report on equalities work every four years would not place an unduly heavy resource burden on committees and would provide significant benefits, including increased awareness for committees of the need to mainstream and monitor equalities issues in their work and a record for external observers of Parliamentary business of how committees were complying with the Parliament’s founding principle of equal opportunities. Discussion and options 5. The previous Equal Opportunities Committee pointed out that, in order to require committees to carry out such a review, a change to Standing Orders would

be needed. The Committee will wish to consider whether alternatives to this should be considered: the Equal Opportunities Committee already has the discretion to ask other committees to carry out equalities reviews and report the results to it, and then to publish the compiled results in the form of a report. It may be that all committees would be willing to cooperate voluntarily on such a basis, and that a Rule to enforce compliance may therefore be considered unnecessary. On the other hand, it may be felt that having a Rule, even if not strictly necessary, reflects the importance attached to equalities issues in the work of committees. Next steps 6. Before taking a decision on which option to pursue, the Committee may wish to seek the views of this Session’s Equal Opportunities Committee and Conveners Group, either through spoken or written evidence.

2

LETTER FROM CONVENER OF THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES COMMITTEE (SESSION TWO) At the Conveners Group meeting on 16 November 2006, Conveners considered a paper bringing forward proposals that committees undertake a review of the work carried out by them in relation to equalities. The paper proposed that an equalities review be produced at the end of each session, starting with the next session. To require committees to undertake such a review would require a change to Standing Orders. The Group supported the proposal and agreed to leave a recommendation in its legacy paper that Standing Orders be amended to provide for an equalities review, coordinated by the Equal Opportunities Committee, at the end of each Parliamentary session. I understand, however, that there may be a possibility of your committee looking at these proposals during this session and, as Convener of the Equal Opportunities Committee, I would be grateful if you could progress this matter. By way of background, I attach a copy of the paper considered by the Convener’s Group. I hope that your committee will be able to give some consideration as to how appropriate changes to Standing Orders might be made to allow the equalities review process to become a feature of the work of committees in the next and future sessions. I would, of course, be happy to provide further background information as necessary and to give evidence to your Committee should it be minded to take this matter forward. Cathy Peattie MSP Convener, Equal Opportunities Committee (Session 2) 23 November 2006

3

Annexe: Paper for Conveners’ Group Mainstreaming Equality in the Work of Committees of the Scottish Parliament Background 1. At the Conveners’ Group meeting on 15 December 2005, Conveners agreed in

principle that it would be beneficial for each Parliamentary committee to undertake a review of the work it had carried out in relation to equalities over this and future sessions and that a more detailed proposal for how this might take place should be brought forward for Conveners’ consideration.

Purpose 2. The purpose of this paper is to put forward for Conveners’ consideration a

detailed proposal for committees to carry out such an equalities review each session. It includes examples of work which could potentially be undertaken by mandatory committees in relation to equalities and included in such a review (paragraphs 15-38). This information was specifically requested by the Convener’s Group when this proposal was considered previously.

Mainstreaming Guidelines 3. The Equal Opportunities Committee published three equality guidelines in its

2003 report on mainstreaming with the aim of building equalities into all of the work of the committees of the Scottish Parliament. These guidelines focused on:

• the scrutiny of primary legislation; • the need for a suitable information base to support the work of committees

in relation to equalities; and • the need for the consultation which committees undertake to be carried out

effectively with due regard to equalities considerations. 4. Conveners will be aware that mainstreaming training has also been developed

and delivered for clerks and SPICe colleagues to support committees in mainstreaming equalities considerations into their work.

Proposed reporting process 5. It is proposed that Committees should produce at the end of each Parliamentary

session a report on the work they have carried out in relation to equalities. For the purposes of these reports, ‘equalities’ will refer to the grounds listed in the interpretation of equal opportunities in Schedule 5, L2 of the Scotland Act 1998.

6. As committees are not uniform in the work they carry out, it is to be expected that their equalities reviews will reflect how they differ from one another. However, for the purposes of clarity it may be beneficial to have reviews reported under a set of agreed headings, such as, for example:

• Legislation

4

• Policy development – the work of the bill sponsor, equality impact assessment, consultation etc

• Committee consideration – consultation, selection of advisers and witnesses, lines of questioning, analysis of evidence

• Inquiries • Remit development • Consultation – selection of advisers and witnesses, lines of questioning,

analysis of evidence • General procedures • Communication, formats, arrangements for meetings, participation events etc

7. The key focus of each equalities review will be to highlight how equalities

considerations have been taken into account from the development stage of a committee’s work.

8. It is suggested that the publication of individual reviews by each committee would be cumbersome and would not provide an accessible overview of the way in which committees deal with equalities issues. It is, therefore, proposed that the Equal Opportunities Committee should co-ordinate the compilation of the equalities reviews and the publication of a single Parliamentary committees’ equalities report towards the end of each session, which would be published on the Scottish Parliament website in the same way as all other committee reports.

9. It is further suggested that, in view of the relatively limited experience to date of mainstreaming techniques and application by committees, the equalities review process should not be conducted at the end of the current session. Instead, it is recommended that appropriate steps should be taken to ensure that this exercise is carried out at the end of the next session.

10. This approach would allow committees the whole of the next session to develop and implement mainstreaming techniques and to produce a meaningful review of their work in this area. In addition, if committees are fully aware at the start of the session that they will be expected to produce an equalities report at the end of it, it is suggested that this will encourage committees to be more effective in their approach to mainstreaming.

Benefits 11. The requirement to produce these reports will encourage committees to

undertake a self-assessment exercise in relation to equalities and will provide:

• an increased awareness for committees of the need to effectively mainstream equalities issues and to monitor how they deal with these issues throughout the session;

• a mechanism for committees to share good practice in relation to mainstreaming equalities;

• a record for external observers of Parliamentary business of how the Parliament’s committees are complying with the key principle of the work of the Consultative Steering Group that the Scottish Parliament in its operation

5

and its appointments should recognise the need to promote equal opportunities for all1;

• an indication of areas where more work is needed to support effective mainstreaming; and

• a useful resource for successor committees. Subject Committees 12. As all of the Parliament’s subject committees scrutinise legislation, hold inquiries

and consult on issues relevant to their work, subject committees will have significant opportunity to exemplify how they have mainstreamed equalities into these key elements of their work.

13. In relation to legislation, for example, they will be able to identify the extent to which they have effectively scrutinised the Scottish Executive’s assessment of equalities impact at the policy development stage of legislative proposals, whether effective consultation has taken place with stakeholders, whether any differential impacts have been quantified, discussed and justified. They will also be able to show how they have included equalities considerations in the committee’s own consultation exercise, any participation events, the selection of advisers and witnesses, their questioning and analysis of evidence.

14. In relation to inquiries, subject committees can identify how they have included equalities criteria when developing and agreeing the inquiry remit, how they have mainstreamed equalities into the subsequent consultation process and selection of witnesses, the structure of the inquiry, participation events, their questioning and their analysis of evidence.

Mandatory Committees 15. The Equal Opportunities Committee recognises that the Parliament’s mandatory

committees do not necessarily carry out the same range of activities as subject committees and that it may not, therefore, be immediately obvious how equalities reviews will apply to the work of the mandatory committees.

16. This section is not intended as a definitive guide for relevant committees and is not seeking to direct the work of the committees concerned. However, it provides some indicative examples of the kinds of work which mandatory committees could potentially undertake during a session and which could subsequently be included in an equalities review of their work. It is expected that once they are familiar with the process and expectations of the exercise, these committees will wish to develop how they report on equalities work.

Audit Committee 17. In correspondence to the Equal Opportunities Committee in relation to the

recommendations in the 2003 mainstreaming report, the Audit Committee noted that its remit is based largely on reports laid before it, in particular by the Auditor General for Scotland (AGS).

1 Shaping the Scottish Parliament, Report of the Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament, The Scottish Office, 1998, page 3

6

18. Staff of Audit Scotland consider equalities issues as standard when scoping the coverage of each AGS study, although the extent to which equalities issues are considered will vary depending on the subject matter, (e.g. AGS studies on performance management systems may offer little scope for equalities issues to be addressed).

19. Accordingly, the Audit Committee could ensure that equalities issues are explicitly addressed when undertaking inquiries into appropriate AGS reports.

20. Although rarely called to act in this capacity, the Committee may also be designated lead committee on primary legislation as was the case in 1999. There will, therefore, be opportunities for the Committee to apply the mainstreaming guidelines in its work and report on this activity.

Equal Opportunities Committee 21. The Equal Opportunities Committee regularly carries out inquiries and other

consultation exercises and has also, in this session, acted as lead committee on a piece of primary legislation for the first time. The Committee will, therefore, be in a position to provide examples of the application of mainstreaming principles to these areas of its work.

European and External Relations Committee 22. Although the European and External Relations Committee does not consider

Scottish Executive primary legislation, it carries out inquiries and can, therefore, report on the extent to which it has included equalities considerations in the development of the remit for a given inquiry, any related consultation process and the selection of witnesses.

23. In relation to the Committee’s inquiry The repatriation of European regional development funding and the UK Government’s proposals: an Inquiry into the impact in Scotland, the Committee could also report on the extent to which the UK Government’s proposals took account of the differential impact on different groups in Scotland.

24. The Committee has also carried out an inquiry into the Scottish Executive’s Fresh Talent Initiative, which would provide the Committee with the opportunity of assessing the extent to which the Scottish Executive had taken equalities considerations into account in the development of the relevant policy.

Finance Committee 25. In its scrutiny of the Scottish Executive budget process, the Finance Committee

has the opportunity to hold the Executive to account in relation to the inclusion of equalities criteria in, for example, the setting of departmental budgets.

26. The Committee also carries out inquiries, such as its review of cross-cutting expenditure on deprivation, for which it launched a call for evidence. The Committee could review the extent to which it considered equalities issues in relation to the remit of this review and the Executive’s policy development process in relation to spending on deprivation.

7

27. The Committee could further report on the extent to which it included equalities criteria in its call for evidence and the subsequent selection of witnesses.

Procedures Committee. 28. The remit of the Procedures Committee is to consider and report on the practice

and procedures of the Parliament in relation to its business. It is acknowledged that many of the procedural issues considered by the Committee are largely of a technical nature and may not necessarily have an impact on equalities. In some contexts, however, there is an opportunity for the Committee to ensure that the Parliament’s business procedures are effectively equality proofed and that equalities principles are built into its work

29. Like other committees, the Procedures Committee carries out inquiries for which it issues calls for evidence and invites witnesses to give oral evidence. For example, the Committee is currently carrying out an inquiry into the use of Parliamentary time. With some aspects of an inquiry of this nature, there would be scope for the Committee to review the extent to which it took into account equalities considerations in the development of the inquiry remit, in its call for evidence and subsequent selection of witnesses. There are also other topics that the Committee might inquire into in future in which equalities issues would be particularly relevant - for example, if it chose to consider the protocols surrounding the use of the division bell.

Public Petitions Committee 30. The Public Petitions Committee (PPC) agreed in February 2004 that all

petitioners should be invited to complete an equal opportunities monitoring form, which it then introduced in May 2004. The monitoring form takes account of age, gender, sexual orientation, disability and race/ethnic status as well as employment status and the Committee has published an equalities report in both 2005 and 2006.

31. As a minimum, therefore, the PPC will be in a position to report on its equalities monitoring process and the impact that this has had on its work.

32. The PPC has, however, also held a number of events to promote the Parliament’s public petitions system. The PPC could, therefore, also report on how it mainstreamed equalities into the organisation of its promotional events.

Standards and Public Appointments Committee 33. It is part of the remit of the Standards and Public Appointments Committee

(SPAC) to consider and report on the adoption, amendment and application of any Code of Conduct for members and matters related to public appointments in Scotland.2

34. The review of the Code of Conduct which is currently underway has involved the equalities officer in redrafting various sections of the Code.

2 Standing Orders, 2nd Edition (8th Revision, January 2006), Rule 6.5

8

35. During the current Parliamentary session, the Committee has reviewed and issued a consultation on the draft Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Bill. This provided the opportunity for the Committee to report on the extent to which equalities criteria were included in the policy development stage of the Bill and how it included equalities considerations in its consultation process.

36. In relation to public appointments, the SPAC could, for example, show how it included equalities criteria in its consideration of the Draft Code of Practice for Ministerial Appointments to Public Bodies in Scotland.

Subordinate Legislation Committee 37. It is part of the remit of the Subordinate Legislation Committee to consider and

report on proposed powers to make subordinate legislation in particular Bills or other proposed legislation3. The Committee considers carefully powers in primary legislation to ensure that these do not authorise the making of subordinate legislation which would be likely to raise equalities issues.

38. In relation to its consideration of subordinate legislation, the Committee considers equalities issues which can arise under the European Convention on Human Rights and under Community law. It is part of the Committee’s remit to draw the attention of lead committees and the Parliament to any instrument that in its opinion fails to comply with any such requirement. The Committee can also report any instrument on the grounds of an unusual or unexpected use of a power which raises equalities issues.

39. The Committee could report on the equalities issues it has considered and reported on in relation to both primary and subordinate legislation.

Procedural issues 40. Should Convener’s Group agree that the equalities reviews process outlined at

paragraphs 5-10 above be conducted at the end of each session, with the first review at the end of next session, it is suggested that an appropriate amendment to Standing Orders be proposed to ensure that this is carried out.

41. It is acknowledged, however, that such a change to Standing Orders should not be proposed until early in the next session, as such a change in the current session would require the review process to be conducted prior to the forthcoming dissolution.

42. The Convener’s Group may therefore wish to agree to include in its legacy paper

a recommendation to its successor body that this issue be revisited early in the new session with a view to initiating a proposal that an appropriate amendment to Standing Orders be made.

Conclusion

3 Standing Orders, 2nd Edition (8th Revision, January 2006), Rule 6.11

9

43. This paper has set out for Conveners’ consideration a detailed proposal for committees to carry out a review of their work in relation to equalities each Parliamentary session.

44. The production of a report on equalities work every four years will not place a

heavy resource burden on committees and will provide significant benefits both internally and externally. The internal benefits include increased awareness for committees of the need to mainstream and monitor equalities issues in their work and the provision of both a mechanism for the sharing and encouragement of good practice and a useful resource for successor committees.

45. The equalities reviews will also produce a record for external observers of

Parliamentary business of how committees are complying with the Parliament’s fundamental principle of equal opportunities.

Action 46. Conveners are invited to discuss and consider:

• whether an equalities review should be carried out by all subject and mandatory committees at the end of each Parliamentary session as proposed;

• whether the Equal Opportunities Committee should co-ordinate the production of these reviews and publish a single equalities report of the reviews;

• whether the first such equalities review should be conducted at the end of the next Parliamentary session;

• whether an appropriate amendment to Standing Orders should be proposed early in the new session to ensure that the equalities review process is carried out;

• whether the Convener’s Group legacy paper should include a recommendation to its successor body that this issue be revisited early in the new session with a view to initiating a proposal that an appropriate amendment to Standing Orders be made

• whether the Conveners’ Group’s decision should be cascaded to relevant clerking staff.

Cathy Peattie MSP, Convener of the Equal Opportunities Committee November 2006

10

Date post:	28-Dec-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

SPPA/S3/07/4/A STANDARDS, PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC ...

Documents