Chamber and committees

We will shift themes a little and look a bit more at the Electoral Reform Society’s work on electoral parity.

We have a range of questions that will help us to dig into some of what you have just highlighted in your opening remarks. Let us see how we go. There will be a little time at the end for the three of you to highlight anything that might not have been brought to light in our questioning.

Elena Whitham has a couple of questions.

Thank you, Margaret. We move to Derek Mackay, and then Douglas Hendry. To frame the contributions a bit more, perhaps you could mention specifically anything that has not so far come to light with regard to the committee’s work on the Boundaries Scotland review.

Thank you, Margaret. Derek, can you give your perspective?

I read the report by the Electoral Reform Society in preparation for the meeting. It was interesting that the report compared the average population per square kilometre in Scotland’s wards to those in the UK and European Union. This may not apply to Shetland and Orkney, but I was struck that the average local authority in Scotland has 163,200 residents, whereas the EU average is 5,630. The report also says that the UK has one councillor for every 2,860 people, whereas Finland has one for every 500.

Those figures might be part of a bigger conversation about real local representation. Our conversation today is about proposed boundaries. Are we on a journey towards more localised representation and a different way of working together? Has that been explored in Shetland or Orkney?

Thank you for the responses so far. I note an interest, which is that I am an MSP for Highlands and Islands. All the council representatives taking part today represent councils that are in my region. North Ayrshire is not in my region, but the council is not represented at the meeting.

I will bring in Meghan Gallacher, who will shift the focus a little bit.

I thank all three of you for coming along this morning. The session has been very helpful—I have certainly become aware of the more nuanced issues that everyone has raised. If we have any other questions, we will put them to you in letter form. I now close the public part of our meeting, and we move into private session for our next item.

Welcome to the fourth meeting of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee in session 6. Our first item is consideration of a decision on taking in private item 3, which will be an opportunity for members to reflect on the evidence that they hear during this morning’s meeting. Are members agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you both for your responses. What has clearly come through the conversation this morning is the point around councillors’ remuneration and the acknowledgement of their role, and how improvement there would encourage people to come forward. The committee has already been talking about that and it is perhaps a piece of work that we need to take on and explore. That would be fitting, because the committee members include three current councillors and a former councillor, so we have a valuable perspective in that regard.

I appreciate your contributions this morning. We have to wrap up this session now, but I give you the opportunity to say whether there is anything that has not come out at all in the discussion. I see that you are both shaking your heads. Okay. Thank you so much for speaking to us today.

I have a question for Karen Greaves, which I will put in writing, on her mention of a tweak to the Kirkwall boundary. I will seek clarity in a letter to her about what she meant by that, because my understanding is that if we accept the boundaries, they must be accepted as they currently stand.

We will have a brief suspension.