Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, minister. What is the timescale for the development of the charter, the independent advocacy and the complaints process? Will the complaints process be independent of ministers as well as commissioners and care service providers?

The committee has heard evidence that there is wide support for a charter, a complaints process and access to independent advocacy, but—there is always a “but”, minister—previous briefings have said that the model for the charter is not clear. Will the charter of rights and responsibilities provide a clear understanding of what people can expect from the national care service in terms of their rights? Will the reference to rights be explicit, will they be enforced and, if so, how?

I am David Torrance MSP.

Recommendation 17 is important, because if we can engage with young people and reach out to them, they will engage with the Parliament much more easily in later life. The Parliament is only just over 20 years old. For many people in Scotland, this Parliament was not here when they were younger or even middle-aged, so it is unlikely that they would have engaged with it at any time in their lives. That is a key point.

On the point about mentorships, internships and competitions, I run a Christmas card competition for school kids, but I could not offer them a prize in the Parliament—a day out in the Parliament and a meal, for example. As you know, that is not allowed. That should be looked at. I have six or seven primary schools involved in my Christmas card competition, which is great.

When I heard that 19 individuals with such different backgrounds were going to meet, I thought that it could be a recipe for disaster. However, I am really impressed with the 17 recommendations and that the group were 100 per cent in agreement on them, so I say well done to every one of the people who took part.

I have a question about engagement and individuals with lived experience. I have been in the Parliament 11 years and some of us have been here a lot longer—I am not looking at the convener. We see the same witnesses all the time. It is the same groups of self-interest. How does the Parliament reach out to get people with lived experience? How do we make the effort to go out into the communities and find people rather than getting the same groups give evidence to the committee all the time?

Everything is focused in the central belt, which is where I live. For rural communities and hard-to-engage areas, especially the areas of deprivation that many of us have in our constituencies, the bus would be a great way for the public to engage with Parliament. How many people in rural communities ever see what the Parliament does or engage with it? In my constituency, I have some of the areas of highest deprivation in Scotland, and it is very difficult to communicate with people in those areas. Something like a bus going into their areas or to their community hubs would promote what the Parliament does and how people can engage with it. It is a really good idea.

I think that, if a bus is to go out, it has to promote how people can engage with the Parliament and how the Parliament can help them to engage. Once we add politicians, another dimension would come in, which would send the whole process skew-whiff. We all know what would happen. We would take our own self-interest to heart—

We all know it. [Laughter.] Let us be open and honest, no matter what. If a bus is to go out there, I really think that we need to keep politicians well clear of it.

I would not believe that.

With regard to point 5, on community engagement, and Maria’s comments, is that not what MSPs are meant to do with surgeries at the weekends to make sure that the public can get to them easily in order to engage?