Seòmar agus comataidhean

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on ScotRail driver recruitment and training programmes, in light of reports of previous service reductions being attributed to staffing shortages. (S6O-04766)

New analysis from Loughborough University has highlighted a strong correlation between Westminster’s cruel two-child cap and child poverty. It also found that SNP policies such as the Scottish child payment have contributed to overall lower levels of poverty across Scotland compared with the rest of the United Kingdom. Will the First Minister advise what assessment the Scottish Government has made of that report? Can he say more about what action the Scottish Government is taking to eradicate child poverty in Scotland despite the barriers that Westminster puts in the way?

Last summer, ScotRail removed Bishopbriggs and Lenzie from the Edinburgh service due to driver shortages, which significantly impacted commuters in my constituency. Will the minister confirm whether driver numbers have now recovered sufficiently to prevent a repeat of such timetable reductions, and whether full service retention is planned for those stations?

Can the cabinet secretary assure me that the Sheriff Abercrombie-led independent review of the system of FAIs into deaths in prison custody will meet and engage with families to hear directly from them about their experiences?

The minister will be aware that the Tories run Aberdeenshire Council, so Mr Burnett should raise the issue with his Tory colleagues. The Scottish Government is funding local authorities to deliver 1,140 hours of ELC to all eligible children, including those in Aberdeenshire. That policy is crucial to providing the best start in life for our children. Will the minister provide information on how the addressing depopulation action plan contributes to that objective?

As the cabinet secretary outlined in her statement, many stakeholders and respondents to the consultation highlighted the local economy as central to their considerations. Can she expand on the Scottish Government’s work to boost and develop the regional economy in the south of Scotland?

Will the cabinet secretary outline how NHS Scotland’s support and intervention framework works as part of an evidence-based approach to monitoring performance and managing risk across the NHS?

Can the minister update the Parliament on engagement between the Scottish Government and local authorities regarding steps that are being taken to remove RAAC in local authority buildings?

Will the minister please expand on how the Scottish Government will continue to work with a range of third sector organisations to ensure that the voices of people with lived experience can help to improve outcomes for LGBTQI+ communities across Scotland?

I am pleased to speak in this debate on an important subject that is not routinely debated in Parliament.

As a relatively new substitute member of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, I found its inquiry into committee effectiveness fascinating. Like Foysol Choudhury, I think that committees are the engine rooms of this wonderful Parliament, whether they are taking evidence on important legislation or initiating vitally important inquiries on subjects that affect the whole of Scotland’s population.

The questions that were central to the inquiry were about what it means for Scottish Parliament committees to be effective, how we can do better and where and how that is being communicated to the public to create maximum engagement and effect.

We took evidence from a wide range of witnesses and gained useful insights into the operation of Parliaments in other jurisdictions. We heard from academics, civil servants past and present, and representatives of all six parties in the Scottish Parliament. All that evidence helped to build a picture of how our committees operate and how, after 26 years of this Parliament, they could be improved.

As our convener and many others have said, the issue of committee size was crucial to our deliberations, with many witnesses stating that small committees work best. That has been well articulated by members from across the chamber today. The downside of having smaller committees would be that not every party could be represented under the d’Hondt system, which we have also discussed today. That system attempts to reflect the party balance in Parliament across all committees, and the Scottish Government is clear that it would be for Parliament to determine whether that system of representation should change.

The gender-sensitive audit marked the importance of having a Parliament that is representative of society. As a member of the audit panel, I fully support that, but gender balance is possible only when a Parliament has a good gender balance to start with, and that rests on the parties’ ability to attract diversity and create a good gender balance during the selection process.

We also examined how the process to elect conveners works—such a process currently operates in Westminster. The Scottish Government does not have a position on that, but I personally am not convinced that that would be the best route to take in a Parliament of 129 members, or that it could easily be introduced. Much of the evidence that we received from Westminster witnesses, although interesting, was not really relevant to Holyrood due to the different numbers of elected members.

It was agreed that churn in committee membership is not ideal but is often not preventable. Jackson Carlaw articulated that perfectly. Changes in membership can hinder members from building the expertise that they need to scrutinise legislation effectively.

We discussed post-legislative scrutiny, or the lack of time to do it, and it was felt that the legislative workload of most committees and the length of time that is now being taken to complete bills do not allow adequate time to do that important task.

It was also agreed that collaborative working between members that leaves party politics aside makes for more effective committees. As a long-standing member of the Criminal Justice Committee, I can testify to that. As others have said, that comes down to the role of the convener. We have excellent conveners in Audrey Nicoll, Martin Whitfield and Kenny Gibson. They unify their committees in a fair and considered way, which makes for far better outcomes.

Time does not allow me to give a comprehensive account of our inquiry, but I believe that we can be very proud of our committee system, which is helped by skilled back-up from our clerks and research teams. However, the structure should always be a work in progress and there will always be room for improvement.