Report of the Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament

SECTION 3.6:

ACCESS AND INFORMATION

Introduction

1. We have already set out in section 2 a number of proposals aimed at meeting our third key principle, that the Scottish Parliament should be accessible, open, responsive, and develop procedures which make possible a participative approach to the development, consideration and scrutiny of policy and legislation. The principle of accessibility permeates our report, and is addressed in our recommendations on Committees (section 3.2), Parliamentary business (section 3.3), accountability (section 3.4) and the legislative process (section 3.5). This section sets out our recommendations on remaining access-related issues, including whether proceedings of the Parliament should be in public, the exclusion of individuals, public petitions, information and communications technologies.

Proceedings of the Parliament

2. Schedule 3, paragraph 3 of the Scotland Act requires Standing Orders to include provision requiring the proceedings of the Parliament to be held in public, and allows the Standing Orders to make provision for the circumstances under which proceedings of the Parliament may be closed to the public. It also allows Standing Orders to make provision as to the conditions to be complied with by any member of the public attending proceedings of the Parliament, including provision for excluding from the proceedings any member of the public who does not comply with these conditions.

3. We considered 2 separate issues: whether sessions in Plenary and in Committee should be public or private and, where such sessions are public, under what circumstances individuals may be excluded. In our deliberations we kept in mind our key principles relating to openness, accessibility and equal opportunities.

4. We recommend that Standing Orders should provide for all Plenary proceedings to be conducted in public. Different arrangements need to be put in place for Committees. The assumption is that Committees should normally meet in public. We recognise, however, that they will need the power to meet in private. However, against the background of the general principle of openness, Committees should keep the number of times they meet in private to a minimum. Standing Orders should authorise Committees to meet in private only with the agreement of a majority of the Committee members present. While this may at first appear to run counter to the principle of openness, we believe it is necessary to balance the need for openness with the nature of business and operational needs of the Parliament.

5. We recognise that it would be normal for Committees to meet in private to discuss approaches to business (for example, to evidence taking) and to consider, for example, how reports might be drawn up. Most Parliaments recognise the need for Committee meetings of this sort to be held in private. This would be preferable to the alternative situation, where the complete openness of all Committee proceedings could lead to genuine discussion taking place outside the official Committee proceedings.

6. However, we also propose that in addition Standing Orders should require Committees to produce regular say annual reports to the Parliament detailing the number of times the Committee has chosen to meet privately. These reports would be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. This, coupled with the background of an open and accessible Parliament, should ensure that closed Committee sessions are the exception rather than the norm.

Exceptions

7. The only situation where this should not be the case should be in the consideration of legislation, where we propose that all Committee proceedings should be public.

8. We also propose that the Business Committee should always meet in private.

9. We also considered whether the Standards Committee should meet in private. While the business of the Standards Committee is of public interest, allegations of misconduct, which might eventually prove unfounded, could damage an MSP's reputation and consideration of such allegations might be held in private although conclusions would eventually become public in a Committee Report. We recommend that the Standards Committee should be able to meet in private where a majority of those Committee Members present felt it was necessary.

Reporting of Proceedings

10. If Committees are to meet in private, for example to discuss reports and make investigations, we propose that there should not be verbatim reporting of such proceedings, as that would remove the justification for the Committee meeting in private in the first place. Nevertheless, the conclusion of their deliberations must be made public. In practice, this would mean that reports of detailed discussions would not be available, but a note of final decisions should become public (perhaps in the form of a Committee report).

Exclusion of particular individuals

11. There are certain conditions under which it is proposed that members of the public should be excluded:

if drunk or under the influence of drugs; if abusive; if indulging in behaviour disruptive to the proceedings (such as speaking loudly, throwing things or using intrusive electronic equipment).

12. We recommend that the Presiding Officer should be given a general power to exclude individuals from the public gallery, when the individual has met one of these conditions. Conveners should be given the same powers in respect of Committees.

Public Petitions

Principles

13. It is an important principle that the Scottish people should be able to petition the Parliament directly.

14. Against the background of our key principles of openness and accessibility, equal opportunities, accountability and sharing the power, we believe that any system adopted for public petitions should satisfy the following criteria:

public petitions should be encouraged by the Parliament; any member of the public should be able to petition the Parliament; there should be clear and simple rules as to form and content; it should be clear to petitioners how and to whom petitions should be submitted; there should be clear expectations of how petitions will be handled, the form of response which can be expected and the time in which such a response can be expected; and all petitions and responses should be in the public domain.

Criteria for acceptance

15. We considered the criteria to be used to determine whether a petition to the Scottish Parliament can be accepted. We concluded that the Parliament should accept all petitions for which the remedy sought would be within the competence of the Scottish Parliament.

Issues

16. We also considered whether there should be a minimum level of support which a petition should enjoy for there to be an automatic obligation on the Parliament to take a certain course of action. This approach is used by a number of other Parliaments we looked at. However a set number of signatures to a petition requiring action by the Parliament might act against individuals or organisations based in more remote areas. For example, it could be much easier to collect 10,000 signatures in Glasgow than in a remote Highland village. Further, a rule requiring action but only where the petition has a minimum number of signatures would only make sense in practice if there were procedures for verifying the authenticity of purported signatures and any such procedure might prove unduly time consuming and difficult to operate. We recommend that the action taken by the Parliament on a particular petition should be dependent on a wide assessment of the strength and depth of support it enjoys, and not only on the number of signatures the petition has.

Presentation to the Parliament and Action to be Taken

17. Any member of the public should be able to present a written petition either to one of their MSPs or directly to Parliament.

18. All petitions should be passed in the first instance to a Committee for Petitions whose first task should be to decide whether the remedy sought by the petitioner fell within the competence of the Parliament. The Committee should also be required to acknowledge receipt of all petitions within a prescribed time limit, informing the petitioners of the action and/or decisions the Committee has taken. The Committee should be given a range of options in dealing with petitions, for example :

no action if the remedy sought fell outwith the competence of the Parliament; forward the petition, along with a brief report outlining the Committee's views, to the Scottish Executive for information or consideration; forward the petition to relevant national/regional authorities for information or consideration; refer the petition to the relevant subject Committee within the Parliament for information, consideration or action; and prepare a report on the petition to be submitted to the Plenary for consideration and/or debate.

Information and Communications Technologies

19. We were informed by the work of the Expert Panel on Information and Communications Technologies, whose report has been published separately (ISBN No. 0 7480 7252 7).

20. We believe that the use of ICT is not an end in itself. To be worthwhile, it must help materially and measurably the achievement of the overall objectives for the Parliament. In our discussions, we found that objectives for ICT generally fall under 2 headings - promoting Parliamentary efficiency through supporting modern ways of working with well-designed information technology; and promoting openness, accountability and democratic participation in Scotland by using technology to make information about the Parliament and its work available to everyone. Provision of ICT must be set in the context of the Parliament's business, so that its success can be measured against the degree to which it helps to meet the objectives of the organisation.

21. We recommend that the following principles should apply to ICT in the Parliament:

it should be innovative; it should allow the Parliament to develop its use of ICT in a planned and coherent way; it should seize the opportunities which modern, well-designed information systems offer for improving openness, accessibility and responsiveness to the people of Scotland; it should aspire to be an example of best practice in Parliamentary information systems, both in terms of external communications and internal efficiency; it should lay the basis for delivering the business of the Parliament efficiently and effectively.

22. We therefore urge that ICT in the Parliament should:

support the business of the Parliament, through the provision of appropriate information systems and facilities which meet the needs of MSPs, their support staff and Parliamentary staff; support MSPs, their support staff and the staff of the Parliament regardless of their physical location; support on-line access by the public to: information about the business of the Parliament information about MSPs information about the Parliament's constitution and history support communications with: national elected bodies at Westminster, in Wales and in Northern Ireland other elected bodies, including local authorities and the EU the public, businesses and the voluntary sector Government Departments, Agencies and organisations provide consistent, timely, accurate and accessible information, presented attractively and creatively; use up-to-date, reliable technology which conforms to widely adopted industry standards; be capable of responding to changing demands from MSPs, their support staff, staff of the Parliament and the public.

23. We endorse the detailed recommendations of the Expert Panel on ICT.

Summary of Recommendations for Standing Orders

Standing Orders should provide:

that all Plenary proceedings should be conducted in public. that Committees should have the power to meet in private, only with the agreement of the majority of Committee members present. that Committees should produce regular reports to the Parliament detailing the number of times the Committee has chosen to meet privately. when legislation is under consideration, all Committee meetings should be public. that the Business Committee should always meet in private. that members of the public may be excluded if drunk or under the influence of drugs; if abusive; if indulging in disruptive behaviour. that the Parliament should accept all petitions for which the remedy sought would be within the competence of the Parliament. that all petitions should be passed in the first instance to a Committee for Petitions. that the Committee should be required to acknowledge receipt of all petitions within the prescribed time limit, informing the petitioners of the actions and/or decisions the Committee had taken. that the Committee should be given a range of options for dealing with petitions for example: no action if the remedy sought fell outwith the competence of the Parliament; forward the petition, along with a brief report outlining the Committee's views, to the Scottish Executive for information or consideration; forward the petition to relevant national/regional authorities for information or consideration; refer the petition to the relevant subject Committee within the Parliament for information, consideration or action; and prepare a report on the petition to be submitted to the Plenary for consideration and/or debate.