Seòmar agus comataidhean

For our second agenda item, I welcome representatives of a proposed cross-party group on the Scots language. Good morning to Jackie Dunbar and to Emma Harper, who join us at the far end of the table. I will hand over to them to give us a short introduction on the proposed CPG.

Excellent. The clerks will pass that information on in due course.

As convener, I always get to ask one exciting question. From the evidence that we have heard today, you are using Scots as a collective description for several minority—perhaps unfairly so—languages in Scotland. Am I right in thinking that you are looking at the scope of minority languages covered by the term “Scots”? I love the fact that groups such as the Doric Society have signed up. I am just looking for clarification that it is about not just what we, in the south of Scotland, would call our lowland Scots, but is about Scots in the proper, collective definition.

Welcome and important.

Absolutely.

Do members agree to accord recognition to the proposed CPG?

Members indicated agreement.

Good morning. I welcome everyone to the 19th meeting of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in 2022. Our first agenda item is a decision on whether to take items 4 and 5 in private. Do committee members agree to that?

Members indicated agreement.

That is very helpful. Thank you, both, for attending the committee this morning. We will consider the application for the proposed CPG as our next agenda item. The clerks will be in touch with you in due course.

Item 3 is a decision on whether to approve the new cross-party group.

Thank you very much indeed. I open it up to questions from the committee.

That is interesting. I mean no disrespect, but I have never envisaged the proxy voting happening just in the chamber. I was thinking of people who, at present, are joining through BlueJeans and making their point of order afterwards. How strange that is. There is a change or difference of experience in this place.

I agree and I think that we need to look at that and possibly discuss it further. People talk with dread about such situations, because of the various planning bills and traffic regulations in the past. Are there any further comments about the letter or are we happy for the trial to be not less than 12 months? I think that we need to have enough data to decide how we go forward. We are talking about the eligibility for a proxy vote including maternity, paternity and bereavement leave. Are we happy with the phrase “serious illness”? Do we want just “illness”?