Meeting of the Parliament 18 September 2025
I do, and I urge Parliament not to support the amendment. I will say more about that in due course.
Before I turn to the detail of our deliberations and our conclusions, I want to place on record my sincere thanks to all those who contributed to our review. First, I thank my MSP colleagues from different parties. We worked well—effectively and collegiately—to produce a good piece of work. That was also thanks to our clerks, who supported us well through the process. In addition, I thank all those who gave evidence. Whether in oral evidence or in written submissions, the insights that we received from them were invaluable. Their time and expertise helped us to shape the recommendations that we present to Parliament today.
Over the course of six months, our committee gathered extensive evidence from a wide range of contributors, including current SPCB-supported bodies, academics, researchers, Scottish Government bodies, the Minister for Public Finance and the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. Taken as a package, our conclusions and recommendations create a clear strategic framework. They aim to establish a formalised process for assessing future proposals to create new SPCB-supported bodies, to strengthen mechanisms for accountability and scrutiny, to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of shared services and, potentially, to change the remits and powers of some existing bodies—I will say more about that later.
Our committee agreed that, consistent with the conclusions that were reached by the Finance and Public Administration Committee, the existing SPCB-supported bodies play a vital role in safeguarding public trust, institutional integrity and democratic accountability. We heard about how such bodies deliver their core functions and saw in person how their offices are adapted to suit the needs of users. For example, the children’s commissioner’s office is a bright and welcoming place for children.
Each body was created by the Parliament in response to a perceived need, and collectively they contribute to the strength and health of our democratic landscape. The work that they do matters, and it makes a difference. However, the evidence that we received highlighted the key concern that the existing landscape has developed in an ad hoc manner, with individual bodies having varying functions and powers. That has resulted in a collection of bodies with distinct and, at times, overlapping functions operating under different legislative frameworks.