Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 20 December 2024
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1538 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “Alcohol and Drug Services”

Meeting date: 21 November 2024

Graham Simpson

All right—we can look at that if we get the Scottish Government in. It is not fair to ask you about it.

I want to ask about an issue that has come up previously about the alcohol and drug partnerships. Do we know what they actually do?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “Alcohol and Drug Services”

Meeting date: 21 November 2024

Graham Simpson

I raise the point because, as you say in the report,

“the role of ADPs is not always widely known across other services.”

If the people who are meant to be providing those services do not know what ADPs are meant to be doing, what are they there for?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “Alcohol and Drug Services”

Meeting date: 21 November 2024

Graham Simpson

Earlier, you said that the Scottish Government does not know what is making the biggest difference. Does that include minimum unit pricing? I think that Cornilius Chikwama mentioned that.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

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

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

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

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

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?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

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?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

Can you name any of those bodies?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

I just found it fascinating.

In session 1, a number of MSPs were also members of the House of Lords: James Douglas-Hamilton, David Steel and Mike Watson. As you would expect, quite a lot of MSPs were also MPs in session 1. The list is as follows: Malcolm Chisholm, Roseanna Cunningham, Donald Dewar, Margaret Ewing, Sam Galbraith, Donald Gorrie, John Home Robertson, John McAllion, Henry McLeish, Alasdair Morgan, Alex Salmond, John Swinney, Jim Wallace and Andrew Welsh.

In session 2, a couple of MSPs were members of the House of Lords—James Douglas-Hamilton and Mike Watson. I do not see any who were also MPs during that session, but we start to see councillors coming through. Those who were MSPs and councillors were Andrew Arbuckle, Charlie Gordon and Mike Pringle.

In session 3, a number of MSPs were members of the House of Lords: George Foulkes, Jack McConnell and Nicol Stephen. Some MSPs were MPs: Margaret Curran, Cathy Jamieson and Alex Salmond. The ones who were councillors in session 3 were Willie Coffey, Jim Hume, Bill Kidd, John Wilson, Nigel Don and—apologies, as I cannot pronounce the name—Stefan Tymkewycz.

The list for session 4 is quite long. The list of MSPs who were also in the Lords consisted of Annabel Goldie. The list of MSPs who were councillors was as follows: George Adam, Clare Adamson, Jayne Baxter, Colin Beattie, Lesley Brennan, Neil Bibby, Willie Coffey, Mary Fee, Neil Findlay, John Finnie, Mark Griffin, Cara Hilton, Jim Hume, Alison Johnstone, Colin Keir, Richard Lyle, Angus MacDonald, Derek Mackay, Hanzala Malik, Mark McDonald, Margaret McDougall, Anne McTaggart, John Pentland, Alex Rowley, Kevin Stewart, David Torrance Jean Urquhart and Bill Walker.

In session 5, the MSPs who were also MPs at some point were Douglas Ross and Ross Thomson. The list of MSPs who were also councillors is actually a very long list, so I will not go through it, but I think—

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 7 November 2024

Graham Simpson

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.