Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 18 September 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2261 contributions

|

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Leases (Automatic Continuation etc) (Scotland) Bill

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

One of the questions that I posed last week was whether, with its proposed codification, the bill would, if it were to pass, help economically. Given what you have both said this morning, my understanding is that you do not think that codification is the right thing to do. However, do you think that the bill would assist businesses in entering and leaving leases?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Decision on Taking Business in Private

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

Good morning, and welcome to the 15th meeting in 2025 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. I remind everyone to switch off or put to silent their mobile phones and other electronic devices.

I want to make the committee aware that Katy Clark will have to leave the meeting this morning, as she is speaking to amendments to a bill that is going through the stage 2 process. Jeremy Balfour is currently at the committee in question, speaking to his own amendments, and he will join us in due course.

The first item of business is a decision on taking business in private. Is the committee content to take items 7 and 8 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Instruments subject to Negative Procedure

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

Under agenda item 3, we are considering four instruments, on which no points have been raised.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Instruments subject to Negative Procedure

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

Is the committee content with the instruments?

Members indicated agreement.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Instruments not subject to Parliamentary Procedure

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

Is the committee with the instruments?

Members indicated agreement.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Leases (Automatic Continuation etc) (Scotland) Bill

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

I have a question to ask before I bring in Bill Kidd.

Stacey Dingwall, a few moments ago, you said that you would be “reticent” about repealing the 1949 act and that, if that were to happen, you would need to have some type of backstop to deal with it. You also touched on how the bill will go some way to dealing with your concerns. Are there any other specific things that FSB Scotland would like to have in place if the repeal were to go ahead, whether that is in the bill or as a separate piece of legislation?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Leases (Automatic Continuation etc) (Scotland) Bill

Meeting date: 6 May 2025

Stuart McMillan

As colleagues have no final questions, I thank you for your evidence this morning. Once again, it has been very helpful and thought provoking. It will certainly help us as we continue our deliberations, with the minister in front of us in a couple of weeks’ time. If there are any particular points to make after today, please send them to us in writing—that would be helpful.

That concludes the public part of the meeting. I move the committee into private.

11:39 Meeting continued in private until 12:05.  

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Auditor General for Scotland (Work Programme)

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Stuart McMillan

Have you looked at any case studies of what has taken place in Inverclyde? Usually, when I come to the committee, I have something to complain about, but I just want to highlight the excellent practice that has taken place in the Scottish Water flood prevention scheme along the A8. Given the amount of joint and partnership working that Scottish Water had to undertake with the local authority, Transport Scotland, Amey and others, that is probably a good model to look at and potentially to replicate across the country.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Auditor General for Scotland (Work Programme)

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Stuart McMillan

Thank you. That is very helpful. With regard to the finances and the lessons learned, I am not sure whether this work is already due to take place as part of the forensic analysis—I hasten to add that I am not making any accusations; I am just referring to where money has been spent—but it would probably be worth looking at the contracts that were signed with external contractors. Quite a range of external contractors have been involved in the building of the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa. Given that the Glen Rosa is still being worked on, whereas the Glen Sannox clearly is not, if you were to look at that aspect with regard to the Glen Sannox in the first instance, that would probably help in relation to the lessons learned if such a piece of work is later undertaken in relation to the Glen Rosa.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Auditor General for Scotland (Work Programme)

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Stuart McMillan

One element that has come up in the short time since I have been back on this committee is the issue of people coming and going within those bodies. I understand that there are a wide range of factors as to why someone leaves a particular role and moves on to a different role. It is also very common within the civil service for staff to be shuffled around. However, in relation to sponsorship arrangements and the folk who work purely in that sphere, I would be keen to explore whether there could be some mechanism whereby, if staff have built up an expertise and are considered to be high performers in that area, the normal rules would not apply and they would see out a particular project instead of moving on to something else. Personal circumstances will obviously dictate that as well, but we would want folk who are doing a very good job to remain in that role and see a project through.