Chamber and committees

We have some more questions on that subject. Colin Beattie wants to follow up on that line of questioning.

I appreciate that. If you can get back to us with those figures, that would be helpful.

Absolutely, and thank you for that undertaking.

I will bring in Willie Coffey, who has questions on areas of future development.

Of course.

I thank Antony Clark and Anne Cairns for their time and the level of information that they have given us. It has been really helpful and given us some direct answers to some important questions that we have been keen to put to them. We shall no doubt see them in the future on the NFI.

I suspend the meeting to allow a changeover of witnesses.

So it is not something that you would prescribe in the job advertisement and the job description for people applying for the post. I have not looked at the advert. Does it say “You will be the accountable officer”, “You might be the accountable officer” or “You might not be the accountable officer”?

Can I infer from that that your expectation is that the new postholder will be the accountable officer?

Okay. Thank you.

I will pick up the point to which Willie Coffey alluded. Paragraph 18 of the Auditor General’s section 22 report points out that, in 2016-17, 43 per cent of complaints against councillors and board members were not pursued further, but, by the time we get to 2020-21, 84 per cent of cases lodged were not pursued. There might have been an increase in vexatious cases that inflated that number, but the Auditor General’s conclusion talks about a “loss of corporate memory” and “significant staff turnover”, and it says:

“it is likely attributable to a change to the way in which incoming complaints were initially assessed.”

I hear what has been said about taking legal advice and not being able to reopen cases. However, someone might have lodged a complaint about the misconduct of a councillor, an MSP, an NHS board member or whoever with an organisation that was clearly malfunctioning, so why is it so categorical that the door is closed to them raising their complaint with an organisation that has now been made fit for purpose but which, according to the section 22 report, was not at that time?

I am anxious to move on, but I have one almost factual question. Since April 2021, the head of corporate services has been the accountable officer for the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland. We understand that you are in the process of recruiting a new commissioner. Will that new postholder also be the accountable officer?