Chamber and committees

Good morning, and welcome to the 20th meeting in 2024 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee.

We have one item on our public agenda today, which is an evidence session with the Minister for Public Finance on Scotland’s commissioner landscape. The minister is joined by the Scottish Government officials Catriona Maclean, who is deputy director of the public bodies support unit, and Steven MacGregor, who is head of the Parliament and legislation unit. I welcome all of you to the meeting, and I invite the minister to make a short opening statement.

Would it be fair to say that that might be looked at?

Okay. I see that David McGill is taking the fifth.

Thank you very much for your evidence today, but before we wind up, I give you an opportunity to make any final points that you feel have not been covered, or which you are desperate to convey to the committee.

Thank you very much.

Today we will take evidence from the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body in our continuing inquiry into Scotland’s commissioner landscape. We are joined by Maggie Chapman MSP, SPCB lead on business support and office-holders; Jackson Carlaw MSP, SPCB lead on finance and organisational governance—I am impressed by those titles, I have to say; and David McGill, clerk and chief executive of the Scottish Parliament. I wish you all a good morning, and I welcome you to the meeting. I understand that Maggie Chapman wishes to make a short opening statement.

Thank you very much. I do have lots more questions, but I will open the session out to colleagues.

I could not agree with you more. What obstacles could be put in the way of the development of myriad commissioners over the next five years or whatever?

Good morning and welcome to the 19th meeting in 2024 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. We have apologies from Ross Greer, in whose stead we have Patrick Harvie. Do you have any declarations to make, Patrick?

Thank you very much. I am sure that you are well aware that we have taken extensive evidence already, but I am keen to get the SPCB’s view, because you are key to the whole discussion. Do you agree that the proposals to establish commissioners are driven by a perception of systemic failure and malfunctions in the system? If so, does the SPCB have any view on ways of addressing those systemic failures other than by establishing commissioners?

I just want to get an idea of what scrutiny means with regard to commissioners.

I have a final question about the existing commissioner landscape. We took evidence from some commissioners, and there seemed to be a kind of drawbridge mentality along the lines of “Our commission’s great, actually. In fact, we need more resources and more powers, and we don’t think there should be any more commissioners”—and it was then a case of them pulling up the drawbridge behind them. There is an element of tension between the commissions themselves, certainly when it comes to new commissioners.

We have discussed rapporteurs for the Scottish Human Rights Commission. How clear are you about the efficiency and effectiveness of the delivery of the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s remit? Do you feel that that commission is in a position where it can proceed with rapporteurs, should resources be made available, or do you think that it must do more to ensure a more effective and efficient delivery of what it is already responsible for?