The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 1485 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
My point is that the principle is one thing, but the workability and the delivery of whatever is going to take place are a different issue. As I understand it, having read the Official Reports of the various committees that were involved at the time, the principle was generally pretty well accepted, but how workable the Government’s proposals were was a completely different issue. That is where the opposition came from.
We started with one bill, which no longer exists, and we now have a second attempt at a bill that is based on what is seen to be more acceptable. Why are you confident that, when it comes to stage 2 amendments and possible stage 3 amendments, the on-going co-design will make the new bill much more acceptable to people?
09:45Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Okay. So, there is the potential for some increase.
I have one final question. In an answer to Michael Marra, you said that you think that the new bill is, in the main, fairly settled. What evidence do you have for that?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
The costs that go alongside that extra work are something that we would find very difficult to control, I presume.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Based on the very interesting comments that you have just made, Dr Ireton, do you feel that there is a case for judge-led inquiries, to ensure that there is public trust?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
If evidence that has not been foreseen comes to an inquiry, is it appropriate to change, extend or modify the terms of reference, to allow that evidence to become a critical part of the inquiry?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Just to be absolutely clear, am I correct in thinking that, if evidence is forthcoming that was not foreseen at the start of the inquiry, it is for the chair to go back to the Scottish Government for any amendment or adjustment to the terms of reference?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
That is why I am asking the question—I was aware of that. In the Inquiries Act 2005, it is clear that there is limited scope for such evidence. As I understand it, not even recommendations can be made to other jurisdictions. Nonetheless, some evidence from foreign jurisdictions might be relevant to a public inquiry. It is just a question of what process can be used to open that up.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
That was generally accepted to be a perfectly acceptable endeavour.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
And secondary legislation, too?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
My second question relates to some of the evidence that we have taken prior to today: namely, that there is concern that the growing demand for public inquiries—with some exceptions; not in relation to Covid, for example—is coming about because there is a perceived failure of Government agencies to address specific problems. Therefore, it is convenient for a Government to push the issue aside and say, “The inquiry will look after that,” when, in fact, there is a role for Government, which should be sorting the delivery of our public services a bit better. Do you agree with that?