Seòmar agus comataidhean

Over the parliamentary sessions, the number of MSPs who are MPs has tailed off, so we have a small number, and the number of MSPs who are also councillors has increased. I was a councillor, so that included me. In every election, quite a large number of the people who are elected to the Scottish Parliament are councillors at the time of election. Therefore, the minister’s point, namely that to do anything about councillors now would be wrong, is well made, so I do not intend to move amendment 3.

I heard what the minister said, I have seen his letter and I have reflected on what he said. I have also reflected on what he has said today, which is that he wants to launch a consultation in this parliamentary session. That is very useful. I am of the clear view that that is the right thing to do. To ban dual mandates for MSPs sitting as MPs—and in the House of Lords, although I will come on to talk about that—is the right thing to do. I think that it is what the public would expect us to do. I think that they expect people to behave in the right way, which means that, if you are elected to two places, you should make the choice between Westminster and here. Bringing that into law would bring us in line with Wales and Northern Ireland. Why should Scotland be an outrider?

I do not think that it is that complicated—it is quite an easy issue—but I accept that there ought to be some consultation. I think that I have the public pulse on the issue, but this bill might not be the place to do that. On that basis, I do not intend to move these amendments. I had intended to move them but, having heard from the minister earlier, I feel that, if he is going to move at pace with that consultation, I am happy not to do so. Unfortunately, that will take us into the next parliamentary session, which means that, if people who are MPs are elected to the Scottish Parliament in 2026, they will not have to resign. I am sure that we can all think of potential candidates. I will not name anyone, but I am sure that we have got people in mind. That would be unfortunate, but I accept what the minister is saying.

On the amendments that relate to the House of Lords, my amendment 2 would make provision that a member of the House of Lords could stand for election to the Scottish Parliament and that, if they were elected, they could either resign or take a leave of absence. That is what Katy Clark has done, and I think that she has done the right thing. My proposal would put that option in law. Because Ross Greer’s amendment goes further than that, I have to say that I disagree with him on this one. I think that we should allow the Katy Clark position to become a matter of law.

I leave it there, convener.

Have you seen that deep-dive exercise in any detail?

Other than WICS, which we know about—our work on it is continuing—have any other bodies been flagged up as being of concern?

WICS is one of 43 non-departmental public bodies. Have you done any work to assess whether we are getting value for money from all those bodies and whether there is any overlap between what some of the bodies do? Is there any merit, in terms of value for money, to amalgamating any of them?

Auditor General, I apologise for being away for most of the meeting. As has probably been explained, I was moving some amendments to a bill at stage 2. Anyway, I am here now.

I want to ask about sponsorship arrangements. In your report, you note that the Government has

“implemented the recommendations set out in the independent review of its relationships with public bodies.”

We on the committee are all aware of the work that you have done on the Water Industry Commission for Scotland. Have you seen any evidence of the implementation of the recommendations following the independent review of the Government’s relationship with public bodies? Are those recommendations leading to any changes?

Can you name any of those bodies?

Mr Wallace, most people have contact with their councils, and councils are now moving more and more to online services. However, there were some comments in the report that I want to put to you.

Exhibit 2, which the deputy convener referred to earlier, says:

“People find it difficult to apply for council tax reductions, as some councils have moved the application process online.”

If people are not online or struggle to use the internet, they find it difficult. The report goes on to say:

“Parents and carers can find it difficult to use digital apps now commonly required to support their child’s education.”

Paragraph 54 says:

“Increased digitalisation of customer services can provide opportunities for people to use self-service options for routine tasks. However poorly planned digital services can disadvantage vulnerable people. Some council services that citizens frequently find difficult to access include: the Blue Badge scheme ... council housing adaptations”

and

“cost of living support and guidance.”

Do you accept all that?

My in-laws, who have sadly passed away, were never online. I do not know how they managed, but, somehow, they got by, and there must be a number of people in that position. Mr Beattie mentioned that earlier. People either do not want to be online or just cannot get online. For council services, it is really important that you cater for those people.

That is very useful in setting out where members of the public can interact digitally. I am glad that you mentioned the health service, because I wish that there was some digital inclusion in the health service. Generally, we are a bit behind the curve in Scotland. [Interruption.] Hang on—I have not finished.

You mentioned work with NHS Lanarkshire. One of the frustrations—certainly for me—is the inability to book a medical appointment or interact with a general practitioner online. Many GPs do not offer that service, so I am interested in what you have to say about NHS Lanarkshire. Will you provide more details of that work?

I am really sorry for your loss. How did that facility work for you?