Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 12 May 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 792 contributions

|

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

Of course. In addition to looking for gaps, we are looking at whether there are ways of consolidating or imitating models that are used in other countries. We want to ensure that we have all the functions that we require to maintain standards in public life, with the system performing as it should, but we are looking at whether those functions need to be in quite so many places. Could you imagine the investigative and adjudicative functions being part of the same body, or is it really important that there be separate bodies?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

I will come back to that in a second. In relation to public trust, I will loop back to the earlier discussion about your objections around the potential combination of an adjudication function and an investigative function. Your objection to that proposal seemed to be not so much structural but about routes of appeal and public trust. If we were to come up with a framework that combined those functions, provided that public trust could be maintained and there were straightforward one-stop shop or portal routes for appeal, would that structure even be feasible, or is there some major objection to that?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

That is brilliant. I liked what you said about the portal and the one-stop shop. The committee should continue to consider that, including whether that might mean creating, for example, an office of public trust that has all those things, so that people do not need to know whether they have to go to the ombudsman or the Standards Commission, for example.

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

I want to look in more detail at the relationship between your organisation and the Ethical Standards Commissioner. We have talked about the investigative function versus the adjudicative function, and you feel that it is really important that those are separate. I wonder how much of that is packaging. You said that your organisation performs as the board for the Ethical Standards Commissioner. You are already part of the same organisation, but there is this sort of separate—

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

My final question is one that I raised earlier with Mr Bruce. You might have a view on it, as well. He said that possible issues with consolidation of bodies include the maintaining of public trust and having straightforward routes of appeal. Have you any thoughts on those?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

You have. It was on your concerns about routes of appeal were bodies to be combined. That is great. Thank you.

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

I have two more questions. You have already spoken about your office situation, your resources and so on, so I will not go into those.

My first question is a little bit like the question that I asked Mr Bruce about gaps. You do not adjudicate decisions about MSPs or lobbyists. Should you? I know that there has certainly been debate in Parliament about the potentially political nature of some of the decisions of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee. Is that a gap? Are we insufficiently independent in that adjudication?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

I will follow on from Ash Regan’s line of questioning. One thing that we are looking at is scrutiny and how all the commissioners fit in the landscape. Parliament watches Government, you watch the MSPs and it sounds as if the Parliament and the Standards Commission watch you. We assume that the voters are watching the Parliament.

On the place where you sit in the landscape, I think that Dr Ian Elliott said that you guys are a sort of a fourth branch of government—you are the ones who watch the watcher. Do you see the other SPCB-supported bodies as sitting within that same space of watching us in public life or, from your perspective, is what they do quite different from what you do?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

That is fine. I probably misunderstood. Thank you for clearing that up.

You adjudicate only on councillors and one other group.

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 30 January 2025

Lorna Slater

The Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee covers MSPs and lobbyists.

If we are looking at consolidating or restructuring the framework, the adjudication function needs to be separate. That does not necessarily need to be done by a commissioner, though. Maybe the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities could do it. What are your thoughts on that?