Seòmar agus comataidhean

The next proposed group that we will consider is the proposed CPG on a wellbeing economy. I welcome Paul McLennan, who is a member of the committee and the convener of the proposed group, and I ask him to give an explanation of its purpose.

The final proposed CPG that we will consider today is on social work. I welcome Fulton MacGregor, who is joining us remotely. He is the proposed convener of the group. Would you like to give a short explanation of the intentions of the group, please?

Do members have any questions? It seems not.

You have a strong list of cross-party members of the proposed group, but I want to ask about its non-MSP membership. I see that you have the support of the consulate general of India and PG Paper Company Ltd. Will it provide secretariat support?

Good morning, and welcome to the seventh meeting in session 6 of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee.

Agenda item 1 is for the committee to decide whether it agrees to take in private item 5, which is consideration of our work programme. Are members happy to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you for those comments. We have previously discussed concerns not just about the quantity—if not the quality—of CPGs but, which is more important, about the time commitment that is required, which Edward Mountain has pointed out. For CPGs to work successfully—as, I think, Tess White managed to draw out in her questions on the proposed group that we considered previously—MSPs have to be able to put the time in, but the fact is that time can very quickly run away from us. The committee will return, sooner rather than later, to discuss—as Mr Mountain has rightly alluded—not individual CPGs but the landscape in which they sit.

If there are no other comments, do members agree to accord recognition to the proposed cross-party groups on the creative economy, India, the wellbeing economy and social work?

Members indicated agreement.

That ends the public part of the meeting. We now move into private session.

The hope is that that will allow you to build on the good intention of allowing access to MSPs and providing them with experience and education with regard to the important country—and, indeed, subcontinent—of India.

That is a very open question for you, Fulton. What would success be for the CPG?

First, I want to note the thanks that you extended at the start of your comments to the others who have helped you. There are nameless people who work very hard behind the scenes in CPGs, and we might need to find some way of giving them recognition.

Secondly, I will highlight two points that you made in your remarks, which are mentioned in reference to the purpose of the group. The CPG will allow

“a space to collaboratively address issues”

across so many fields, and it will

“seek to raise awareness of the profession and to raise its profile in a positive way”,

which I think is much needed.

I thank Mr MacGregor for attending the meeting and for his application form and submission. We will take a decision on the proposal later in the meeting, and the clerks will notify the member in due course.

We now move to agenda item 3, which is approval of cross-party groups. As I have explained, Paul McLennan, who is a member of the committee, will step outside the room and not take part in the decision on the cross-party group on which he gave evidence this morning.

The committee is asked to consider whether to accord recognition to the proposed CPGs on the creative economy, India, the wellbeing economy and social work. Do members have any comments?

The next proposed cross-party group that we will consider is the proposed CPG on India. I welcome Pam Gosal, the co-convener of the proposed group, and I invite her to make a short statement about its intentions.