Chamber and committees

I have a final question for Mr Ogle and Mr Gourlay. The issue has been touched on already, and I do not want to overestimate the abilities of parliamentarians or underestimate the abilities of experts but, over and above existing bodies, is there a question about whether the scrutiny—rather than the monitoring—of the success of policies should be done by elected or unelected bodies?

Returning to the issue of policy coherence and what we all understand that to mean, in the past, many people in the Parliament, the Government and elsewhere have talked about mainstreaming interest and involvement in the work of the Government’s international development department across all parts of Government and the public sector.

Where do you think that we have reached on that agenda, whether on practical issues, such as how we distribute surplus equipment or how we involve different areas of Government in that enterprise, or, more broadly, on awareness in different parts of Government and the public sector of the importance of work in Malawi and elsewhere? I put that question first to David Hope-Jones and then to Lewis Ryder-Jones.

My example about hospital equipment was not meant to cover the breadth of policy coherence, although you make a very fair point. What I am driving at is whether other parts of Government are becoming more aware of the very important issues that you have just mentioned. Is it possible to ensure that those ideas are not completely corralled within your department? That is what I am driving at.

I would like to ask David Hope-Jones how our understanding of climate justice has developed post-COP and post the review of international development policy in Scotland; if you wish, you can answer specifically on Malawi. Lewis Ryder-Jones might want to respond on that issue, too.

Thank you. I am very grateful for that answer.

I have a final, brief question for Ms Merelie. I think that it was you who mentioned the on-going factual context of the particular situation in Northern Ireland. I appreciate that it is not the same situation as Scotland’s, but, if there is an on-going policy intention in Scotland, which appears to be becoming consistent, of keeping pace with European requirements, is there also a factual context that is building up around Scotland that has to be borne in mind?

Lewis Ryder-Jones, do you have any comments to make on that? A few years ago, I had the privilege of being in Malawi on behalf of the Government, and people spoke to me about the issues that David Hope-Jones has just mentioned. They said that they could see the climate and the landscape changing radically and dramatically around them. Although I do not think that anyone expects Scotland on its own to be able to put that right, could you say something specifically about Malawi and what Scotland is working for and doing as far as climate justice issues there are concerned?

This question is directed to Rachel Merelie. I appreciate that you are not a political body and are not making political decisions, so please do not think that I am in any way holding you accountable for this, but how are you, as a body, going to navigate the reality that you are implementing an act that does not enjoy overall political support in Scotland?

Lewis Ryder-Jones, is there anything that you want to say from the Government’s point of view? Can you evidence such activity?

My next question is for Sheila Scobie. Jenni Minto asked about various examples of the kind of things that might come before you for a decision or for you to produce advice and factual information on. You mentioned the concept of a barrier to trade. As Jenni Minto pointed out, that is a contentious concept in a number of areas, not least around the control of alcohol pricing. Quite accurately, you mentioned that all you can do is provide factual advice—it is then up to ministers to make a political decision. Have you any picture of what context or what process UK ministers would use to reach such a decision? Do you have a clear picture of how that process would work at their end?

I welcome what you have said and the recognition of the backlog in many of the ways in which crofters interact with the commission. Part of the commission’s function is to tackle derelict or all-but-abandoned crofts and, one might hope that in the future it will deal with the growing problem of speculation in crofts. Is the review of the staff and the budget an opportunity for the commission to do things differently?