Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is very helpful.

Thank you for attending the meeting. The committee will consider whether to approve the application for recognition under the next agenda item. The clerks will be in touch after that to inform you of our decision.

We will now have a short suspension for a changeover of witnesses.

You have Midlothian Disability Access Panel, which is phenomenal.

We will now move to agenda item 2 in the second meeting in 2022 of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee.

The committee has been considering a complaint about a former member of the Scottish Parliament. On behalf of the committee, I will now read out a statement that sets out the committee’s findings.

The committee has considered a complaint from Mr Joe Lo about Alison Harris. The complaint is that Alison Harris did not appropriately register the true market value of the shares that she held in Georgian Finance Company Ltd in the register of interests.

The committee is unanimous on the decision reached on the complaint. The committee cannot concur with all the findings in fact of the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland and does not agree with the commissioner’s conclusion.

In relation to the commissioner’s findings in fact, the committee does not consider that the valuation of the market value of the shares in Georgian Finance Company Ltd secured by the commissioner can be deemed to be the definitive market value of the shares in the context of the code of conduct. Indeed, the committee highlights that material included in the commissioner’s report illustrates that experts can have conflicting views on the market value of the shares in private limited companies because different methodologies can be used to determine that.

The committee was cognisant that the code of conduct for MSPs does not provide a definition of market value, and nor does it prescribe any methodology for ascertaining the value of shares. However, the code states:

“On detailed financial and commercial matters,”

a member

“may wish to seek advice from other relevant professionals.”

Alison Harris indicated in her representations to the committee that she had sought the professional opinion of the company’s accountant on the market value of the shareholding, which she interpreted as being nil due to her being unable to freely sell her shares.

In relation to the commissioner’s conclusion, the committee does not agree that there are sufficient grounds to conclude that there has been a breach of the Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Act 2006 and the code of conduct.

Alison Harris registered an interest in shares on the basis that she held more than 1 per cent of the nominal value of the issued share capital of the company. She did not, additionally, register those shares on the basis of the market value exceeding 50 per cent of a member’s salary at the start of the relevant parliamentary session, because she ascertained the shares to have a market value of £1.

Although the committee recognises that a fair observer might reasonably consider the market value to be higher, there were conflicting expert views on the market value of the shares. In addition, the committee could not draw on either a definition of market value or a prescribed method for reaching a market valuation within the code to reach an incontrovertible conclusion that the market value of the shares exceeded the threshold. For those reasons, the committee does not consider that it is in a position to reach the conclusion that a breach of either the act or the code has taken place.

The committee recognises that there are many different types of shareholdings, particularly in relation to private limited companies, and that, in some circumstances, ascertaining a market value for shares can be complex. For that reason, it intends to consider that matter further with a view to revising the guidance on the code of conduct for MSPs to provide more clarity to members on the registration requirements and greater transparency to the public on members’ interests.

In conclusion, although the committee does not consider that there are sufficient grounds to consider that the code of conduct has been breached in relation to the complaint, it reminds all members that they should approach the registration of their financial interests in the spirit of the utmost transparency to ensure that their integrity and propriety cannot be called into question.

Full details of the complaint and the commissioner’s investigation of it will be included in the committee’s report, which will be published later this afternoon.

We will now move into private session.

Good morning. I welcome everyone to the first meeting of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in 2022. I wish everyone a happy new year.

Our first agenda item is a decision on taking the final item in private. The committee needs to decide whether to take item 6, under which the committee will consider its approach to an inquiry on future parliamentary procedures and practices, in private. Do members agree to take item 6 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you very much for that presentation. Before we take the matter further, I note, in stark black and white, my name as a member of the proposed CPG, which is slightly unfortunate. As you may be aware, I have said that, in order to provide the distance for this committee to operate and because of my role as convener, I will not be joining or associating with any CPGs. I would be grateful if that could be rectified.

I am very supportive of the pub trade and recognise its importance across Scotland. My question relates to the secretariat and the relationship between the CPG, which sits here, in the Scottish Parliament, and the All-Party Parliamentary Beer Group, which sits in Westminster. Is it the case that the actual secretariat’s support and work would be provided by CAMRA and SIBA rather than by the APPG in Westminster?

Thank you for putting that on the record.

As members have no more questions, I thank the minister and his officials, as ever, for their evidence.

The minister will remain present for item 5. I invite him to move motion S6M-02576.

Motion moved,

That the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee recommends that the Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment Order 2022 be approved.—[George Adam]

Motion agreed to.

I thank the minister and his officials for attending this morning’s meeting, and I close the public part of the meeting.

Thank you for clarifying that. It is now on the record.

Paul, although the organisations that have expressed interest—in particular, Maritime UK, which will act as the secretariat—are relatively small in number compared with those on some CPGs, they cover a substantial part of the shipbuilding industry in Scotland. Will there be room for smaller players, if I can describe them as such? I see that you list the University of Strathclyde’s department of naval architecture, and I am aware of other technical courses that relate to shipbuilding. I presume that the CPG is open to an approach from such groups.

Excellent. Thank you for that. Since no other committee member wishes to raise a question, I thank Beatrice Wishart for attending. At agenda item 3, the committee will consider whether to approve the application for recognition. The clerks will inform you, Beatrice, of the committee’s decision thereafter.

The final group that we will consider today is the proposed CPG on sustainable transport. I welcome Graham Simpson MSP, who is its proposed convener. Good morning, Graham. Will you make an opening statement about the intentions of the CPG?