The remaining agenda item concerns petition PE578. I thank the clerks for the helpful background paper to the petition, which gives members the history of the subject matter of the petition. The options that are available to us—in essence, there are three—are summarised on page 2 of the paper. First, as the Deputy Minister for Justice is due to appear before the committee next week, we could raise the subject with him. The other two options are that we take further advice on the ECHR issue or take no further action.I am inclined to say that, given the proximity of the minister's appearance before us, it could be helpful to use that opportunity to raise the matter with him. Do members agree to that suggestion?
Official Report · Committee
Petition
Public Bodies (Complainers' Rights) (PE578)
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- Annabel Goldie Con 5
- Mike Pringle LD 4
- Colin Fox SSP 1
- Karen Whitefield Lab 1
The record
12 contributionsWould that preclude our taking action on the second option? We should take up both options.
We could do both. I am not sure what other members feel, but I think that it might be premature to take action on the second option until we hear what the minister has to say on the matter. If the minister had something informative to tell us, that could be sufficient for the committee's purposes. If Mike Pringle agrees, my inclination is to let the minister make his comment before we decide on further action.
Okay. It was just a suggestion.
I am happy with the convener's suggestion. However, the issue will be one of many that we will take up with the minister when he comes before us. That is said by way of an observation.
As a courtesy, we will give the minister notice that we want to raise the issue with him.
Will we also tell the minister about the question that was raised by the Faculty of Advocates?
By the time that the minister comes before us, he is likely to have a good idea of what we are going to ask. I suspect that a note will be taken of what was said at today's session—indeed, the minister might have someone at the committee today, taking a note for him. I think that the minister will be well briefed.
Good.
The clerk is giving us some very helpful advice, which is that we should give the minister notice that we want to have a word with him about the petition. We have always recognised that petition PE578 is not unconnected to the bill that we are scrutinising. However, having listened to the minister, we might decide that the matter is not germane to the bill for our present purposes. If so, we could decide that the petition should be given further consideration on its own merits. I suggest that we leave the matter at that. Let us see what the minister can tell us next week.Members indicated agreement.
That is all the business on today's agenda. I thank members very much indeed. It has been a long but fruitful meeting.
Meeting closed at 17:02.
In this meeting
Everything on 23 Sep 2003 →- Scottish Parliament Justice 2 Committee Tuesday 23 September 2003 (Afternoon) Committee business · 1
- Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1 Bill debate · 358
- Petition Petitions · 12
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.