Committee
Enterprise and Culture Committee, 13 Feb 2007
13 Feb 2007 · S2 · Enterprise and Culture Committee
Item of business
Legacy Paper
That is what I thought.In paragraphs 8 and 9, which are about working practices, we need—for clarity if nothing else—to distinguish between what is formal and informal, what is private and not private and what takes place in a round table and across the table. The variations on a theme do not come across. The example is given of the social enterprise session, which was too far along the spectrum. That session was a round table and informal and was therefore in private, so it was without an Official Report, for example. We pushed that session too far along the spectrum. It could have been a round-table discussion with the OR, which would have felt better for all concerned.The legacy paper does not convey the fact that we have had bona fide informal meetings, some of which have been valuable just as briefing sessions, such as the Royal Society of Edinburgh's briefing on its renewable energy report. Nobody would suggest that that could or should have been made more formal or public. It is good to channel such events just to committee members.On the other hand, when we tried to capture something from the bona fide informal meeting that we had with Scottish Enterprise about its structural changes, we ran into difficulties in pure process terms, if nothing else, because we had not captured the discussion.I think that we would all agree with what I have said, on the basis of experience. My plea is that the legacy paper should unpack all that a little more. If a recommendation is to be made, I suggest that we should recommend or suggest that our successors continue the practice of considering a range of models. The point is to find the right one to suit the purpose. That is partly about the subjects, partly about the organisations involved and partly about the timing of what we do with the output from the discussions. Stephen Imrie could elaborate a bit on that. I do not want him to write a book, just a few extra paragraphs.
In the same item of business
The Convener:
SNP
We discussed an approach to our legacy paper and the first draft has now been circulated. I ask Stephen Imrie to introduce it, please.
Stephen Imrie (Clerk):
I circulated a draft of the legacy paper. Previously, the committee discussed a framework and agreed the structure for the legacy paper, which I have fleshed...
The Convener:
SNP
There is only one full meeting of the committee left, although we need a special meeting to deal with a Scottish statutory instrument. It is likely that the ...
Murdo Fraser:
Con
I am generally content with the legacy paper, which is comprehensive and covers all the ground. I would like to make a small point about paragraph 21, which ...
Stephen Imrie:
I recall that the idea of a skills summit was discussed. I would be happy, if members wish, to say a bit more in a redraft of the legacy paper about what a s...
Murdo Fraser:
Con
That would be helpful.
The Convener:
SNP
In light of the Leitch review and talk from some parties of establishing a full employment agency, it is a very relevant subject.
Christine May:
Lab
I have a number of comments. The first relates to the Harold Wilson quotation in the paper. I am not averse to a quotation, but perhaps we can find a better ...
The Convener:
SNP
I have one from Alex Salmond. Would you like that to be included?
Christine May:
Lab
Is it the tip for the 2.45 at Newmarket?
The Convener:
SNP
It was Stephen Imrie's idea to include the quotation. When he asked me whether I wanted it to be left in, I said yes, as I wanted to see who would move to ta...
Christine May:
Lab
I am more than happy to have a Harold Wilson quotation—just not that one.
The Convener:
SNP
I forecast that it would be you.
Christine May:
Lab
I know that—why do you think I raised the matter?To an extent, paragraphs 7 and 19 deal with the same subject—the overlap in the remits of various committees...
The Convener:
SNP
Is everybody happy to add a reference at that point to joint working?Members indicated agreement.
Christine May:
Lab
I felt that one sentence in paragraph 11 said, "You really have to do your homework, members, because it is not good for you or your mental processes to have...
The Convener:
SNP
Should we rephrase that paragraph?
Christine May:
Lab
We should rephrase it to make it a little less teacher-ish.
The Convener:
SNP
Okay. Do members have other comments?
Karen Gillon:
Lab
I do not disagree, but I like the sentiment behind paragraph 11.
Christine May:
Lab
So do I.
Karen Gillon:
Lab
The change has been important.
The Convener:
SNP
Our practice is much better, although it has downsides, such as very long questions. I tend not to interrupt members, because it is up to members to pose que...
Christine May:
Lab
Do the words "pot" and "kettle" come to mind?
The Convener:
SNP
My experience is that members should be given the maximum freedom to ask what they want to ask. They are the members of the committee.
Susan Deacon:
Lab
I say—to avoid doubt—that I agree completely with the convener. However, I am a bit confused. Karen Gillon referred to "the change" and we have talked about ...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
The theme has been pretty regular in other committees, too.
Susan Deacon:
Lab
It is important to make it clear that we have not made a change; we just did not adopt the practice, although some committees have. I agree absolutely that w...
The Convener:
SNP
The situation was the same in the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee, which did not have prepared questions.
Susan Deacon:
Lab
That is what I thought.In paragraphs 8 and 9, which are about working practices, we need—for clarity if nothing else—to distinguish between what is formal an...