Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee 02 March 2011

02 Mar 2011 · S3 · Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee

Item of business

Public Records (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Hyslop, Fiona SNP Lothians Watch on SPTV

Amendment 37 seeks to remove a crucial part of the bill and cuts to the heart of the bill, which is about the management of records, not the content of records. The definition of public records applies only to this bill and to the management of said records. Section 3 defines “public records” for the purpose of part 1. The definition is essential and intentionally broad. Public records are the records that must be covered by the records management plan for an authority. Removing the section would leave the bill without a definition of public records and would strike at its very core. A definition is necessary to ensure that those who are responsible for managing records know which records fall within the scope of the bill, and the obligations that will be placed on them. A definition is also necessary to ensure that the keeper knows which records should be covered by an authority’s records management plan and can assess whether that plan makes proper arrangements for the authority's records. It is important for the bill to be clear about which records are covered in order to prevent confusion. All public authorities need to be accountable with regard to the range of services that they provide, and to manage all their records properly.Removing the definition would mean that, although authorities would have a duty to draft and implement a records management plan and the keeper would have a duty to consider whether those plans make proper arrangements for managing records, neither the authorities nor the keeper would be able to judge which records should be covered. The definition is broad to ensure that all records that could be created or held are covered, so that vital records are identified and retained for their correct periods, and time and resources are not wasted in storing less important and ephemeral records. The definition also helps to future-proof the bill, as it must cover records in any format.The list of authorities that is included in the bill focuses on those record creators that are most closely associated with central Government, such as agencies and public bodies. It also includes local authorities, which are major record creators and play an important role in the provision of services. Records relating to functions that contractors provide are included, to address a key element of the Shaw report. Importantly, only those records that relate to functions that are carried out on behalf of public authorities are covered.Both COSLA and the voluntary sector have argued that the bill should focus only on high-risk records. Managing only certain records in an organisation is not good records management practice, and the keeper would find it difficult to approve a records management plan that took that approach. It would also create uncertainty about which records were covered and who should decide whether they were low or high risk. As we have debated in the committee previously, that should not be a job for the keeper. Instead of our excluding types of records from the bill, authorities should assess levels of risk and make provision in their records management plans to manage different records differently; they are the ones who can assess the risk element. Earlier, we debated amendment 1, which makes clear that that is how risk should be addressed in records management plans.The bill would be technically unworkable without a definition of public records. Elizabeth Smith is correct to explore the issues around that, because it has been a central theme in debates. However, unless we have such a definition, it will not be clear to authorities or to the keeper whether a records management plan covers the right records. I invite Elizabeth Smith to withdraw amendment 37, having considered the matter and heard some of the issues that have been raised.

Search Hansard contributions

Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee 02 March 2011

In the same item of business