Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is really clear and helpful. We will enjoy seeing the minister back here next March so that we can ask him about that.

They look at those documents and sign them off before they introduce the bill, do they not?

Therefore, in the future, would you make a more conscious effort, where previously you might have been silent, to say where you are happy with things, so that the committee knows that it does not need to look at those things? At the moment, your stuff tends to provide a commentary on the things that you are most concerned about but says nothing about the other bits, and then the committee has to make a—

Thank you.

It is not political. I do not think that framework bills are good in any Parliament. There are times when they can be used, but there has to be enough information included in the bill for parliamentarians and the public to know what their national Parliament is passing before people cast their vote, instead of us just saying that the rest will come later, once the bill has passed. I do not think that that is a good way to work.

I welcome those comments on trying to get things right. I want to ask about some of the historical commitments that the Scottish Government has made. One is in relation to an amendment to the Scotland Act 1998 (Specification of Functions and Transfer of Property etc) Order 2019 (SSI 2019/183). Has there been any progress on that that you can share with the committee?

I think that there are a few others that are outstanding.

I come back to the issue of explanatory notes. I note that you said that some of it is down to the eye of the beholder, but a lot of different ministers across Government introduce a lot of different bills. I want to push you a wee bit on what is being done to ensure that there is a common understanding of what is needed in explanatory notes. We have heard that some conveners think that there is too much in explanatory notes and some too little, and the Parliament has the opportunity to say that, but there has recently been a degree of variation. I know that there is a balance to be struck, but is someone working across the Government to ensure that all bills—

I hear what you are saying about flexibility and that some people will always be unhappy, but do you recognise that there is a challenge when such discussions are taking place away from the Parliament? Some stakeholders worry that the people who have louder voices, who are able to lobby harder, who have more professional support, or who might be perceived to be closer to the Government politically, might have a better chance of getting what they want through that process than those stakeholders would if it went to Parliament as a whole and were subjected to the full scrutiny of primary legislation.

Do you recognise that there is a tension there? Whether or not you think that the process works well, there is a tension.