Skip to main content
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 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 19 October 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1235 contributions

|

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Scottish Information Commissioner

Meeting date: 22 February 2024

Ivan McKee

It is interesting that you can see a culture. I suspect that Stephen Kerr will jump on that, so I will leave it to him to do so.

Is there any calculation or sense of how much the whole process of pulling information together for FOIs costs across the public sector?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Scottish Information Commissioner

Meeting date: 22 February 2024

Ivan McKee

I am sorry, but are you saying that the cost number does not include all the costs?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Scottish Information Commissioner

Meeting date: 22 February 2024

Ivan McKee

Right—so that is excluded from the cost calculation.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Scottish Information Commissioner

Meeting date: 22 February 2024

Ivan McKee

Could that have a significant impact on your case load?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Social Care (Self-directed Support) (Scotland) Act 2013 (Post-legislative Scrutiny)

Meeting date: 20 February 2024

Ivan McKee

No, it is okay.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Cross-Party Groups (Annual Monitoring Report)

Meeting date: 8 February 2024

Ivan McKee

I have a few comments. First, I thank the clerks for the huge amount of work that has gone into pulling together this comprehensive document, which outlines the performance or otherwise of various CPGs. To be frank, CPGs are hugely fundamental to the Parliament, because they enable members of the public and interest groups to engage with parliamentarians and visit the Parliament building fairly regularly. The number of CPGs will be the number that can be supported, because that represents thousands of people coming into Parliament regularly, which is absolutely to be encouraged.

Having said that, I think that, to be frank, people who operate CPGs should be able to meet the requirements, which are not especially onerous with regard to the number of meetings, the number of members involved, producing minutes and so on.

It might be interesting to consider having a more formal process for derecognising CPGs in extremis and potentially having an intermediate step. I understand that the clerks write to conveners, but that is just an email in the background. We could have a process so that, when we recognise that a CPG is struggling, that is made public knowledge on the website, so that members of the CPG recognise that there is an issue and step forward to do work to reinvigorate the group. It would be unfair simply to get notification one day that a CPG no longer existed without having had the opportunity to engage and seek parliamentary support.

There could be an intermediate step that formally recognised the difficulty and then a derecognition step. Perhaps it would be helpful to come back to this in three months, rather than leaving it to once a year. Although 76 CPGs have done absolutely everything that has been asked of them, a number have not, and it would be remiss of us not to look at that further in short order.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Cross-Party Groups (Annual Monitoring Report)

Meeting date: 8 February 2024

Ivan McKee

I seek clarification on that point, convener. You described a process whereby a CPG decides that it wishes to cease to be a CPG. Is there a process whereby, in some circumstances, the committee may decide that it wishes to derecognise a CPG, even if that CPG has not volunteered to be derecognised?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 (Post-legislative Scrutiny)

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Ivan McKee

Is that at a UK level or a Scotland level?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 (Post-legislative Scrutiny)

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Ivan McKee

That is helpful, and it puts some of the other numbers that we are talking about today into context. Thanks very much.

The last thing that I want to focus on is the uprating of MUP. What is your perspective on that? What should the mechanism be? Should it be automatic? Should it be based on inflation or affordability? I am going back to the graph that we have just discussed. I am keen to get anyone’s perspective on how we should progress that.

10:00  

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 (Post-legislative Scrutiny)

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Ivan McKee

The question that I am asking is about basic economics. If somebody had said to me, when I was running a business, “You have the opportunity to increase prices without increasing costs”, I would have seen that as positive, not negative. I am trying to understand why you see it as an economic challenge rather than an economic opportunity.