Scottish Commission for Public Audit, 12 Dec 2007

Meeting date: Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Official Report 97KB pdf

---

Working Practices

For the next item, a paper has been prepared by the secretary on an issue on which we reflected during our away day. We picked up from the legacy paper the fact that the commission does not have the protection of privilege in relation to defamation. As the paper says, we have some protection in relation to publications but not in relation to our proceedings.

I am interested to hear what the lawyer among us—there is just one—makes of the suggestions. At our previous meeting, we agreed that, although the issue was not high on our list of priorities, we needed to consider whether there was a relatively painless way of addressing it. Members felt that there was a discrepancy. Various potential courses of action are outlined in the paper—some are more straightforward than others.

The matter is certainly not worth a committee bill on its own. On the suggestion of a change being tacked on to something else, the bill to tidy up the powers over ombudsmen and commissioners would seem the most likely. Without our knowing what is coming, however, it is perhaps premature to identify a precise bill.

This is a matter of agreeing the recommendations in the paper. We need to do something at some point. The changes should be tacked on to a bill, and we will look out for an appropriate opportunity to do that.

Are there any other comments?

The recommendations seem sensible. In the meantime, we should watch our language.

Indeed. We agree to the recommendations in the paper.

Meeting continued in private until 11:56.