Seòmar agus comataidhean

I certainly think that that is helpful and, of course, having, in essence, granted the proxy in the first place, the Presiding Officer will be aware of that.

I hear what you say about stage 3 proceedings but, despite the chaos that sometimes ensues when we have problems with the voting apps—even in the chamber, if members happen to be in one of those down spots—a very small number of points of order are made, even during stage 3 proceedings, so I am not sure that it is a massive inconvenience.

I agree with you about the use of any statutory definition of time in relation to holding a proxy vote for parental leave. I wonder whether it comes to how long the proxy should exist for. Are we looking at a period of time? It could be that, once a member has a proxy, all proxies last for the same period, albeit with flexibility on an individual basis, which we have talked about, as well as the opportunity for it to be extended—subject to the consent of the PO, who grants the right for the proxy in the chamber. Bob, would that give you more comfort than trying to define it into a statutory—

I think that you are right that, during the trial period, the committee would welcome the evidence and opinions that come out and the views that members have. In that way, when the committee comes to review whether to continue the temporary rule change, that can be taken into account. We will need some flexibility, because we have no evidence about how it will work. It has never been done and I do not want to frighten away any members who may wish to exercise a proxy vote out of fear of the committee hugging their shoulders to see how it is going.

Good morning. I welcome everyone to the 18th meeting in 2022 of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee. I have received apologies from Collette Stevenson, who is unwell today.

Agenda item 1 is a decision on whether to take agenda item 3 in private. Do members agree to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

That is very helpful.

I note from the completed registration form that a number of existing CPGs that cover some but not all of the intended purposes of the proposed CPG have been identified. I appreciate the evidence that you have given on outreach with regard to stakeholders and other MSPs. Has there been any formal contact yet with existing CPGs about the potential for joint work?

I thank you for your comment on the responsibility that you and your office would have with regard to the CPG. We might address that aspect at the end of the meeting, although not specifically in relation to your proposed CPG.

Do members have any questions?

Excellent.

Thank you for attending this morning. The committee will consider the application at its next agenda item, and the clerks will notify you in due course. I wish you all the very best for the rest of today.

Would you like to explain the purposes and ideas behind your proposed CPG?

Michael, you are obviously aware of the questions that have been raised about CPGs and, in particular, about the balance of work that MSPs have to undertake. I am more than happy for you to give your views on that to this committee, but it will also form part of our business going forward. That is not to detract from Bob Doris’s question, because it would be interesting to hear about that outreach and about your confidence that there is an interest among individual parents and groups of parents outwith this place.

Do members have any other questions?