Audit Committee
Last week the Committee received a second briefing on the Auditor General for Scotland's (AGS) investigation into "How Government Works", concentrating on leadership development across public services.  The report notes that there are significant examples of good practice in this field, but recognises that one in five bodies do not know how much they spend on it.  The AGS therefore concludes that the Executive is well placed to develop a clear policy framework which will ensure a consistent and effective approach to leadership development.

The Committee also considered responses from the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) and the Scottish Executive on the AGS' 2004/05 audit of the SPS. Much of the discussion of this audit had focused on the need for a contingency fund for potential court cases by prisoners slopping out in Scottish prisons, following the compensation case raised and won by Robert Napier.  At the previous meeting on this issue, there was a suggestion that more Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures could be employed to avoid costly court cases.  In response this week, the SPS highlighted the moves to secure sites for the building of two new prisons to deal with the overcrowding which has led to the practice of slopping out in shared cells.  The Executive responded with its support for the use of ADR "where feasible and appropriate".  The Committee agreed to write to the SPS requesting to be kept informed of developments with regard to the completion of the new prisons and to write to the Scottish Executive to seek reassurance on the adequacy of its contingent liability.

Education Committee
The Committee considered its draft stage 1 report on the Joint Inspection of the Children’s Services and Inspection of Social Work Services (Scotland) Bill. The report has now been published and is accessible here.

The Committee also dealt with the subordinate legislation which provides for civil partners to receive similar pension rights as married couples in relation to teachers' superannuation.

The Scottish Consumer Council then gave evidence to the Committee on the Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Bill.  The SCC supports the aim of the Bill, which is to modernise and strengthen the system for supporting parental involvement in school education.  However, they want to see an explicit reference to both parental involvement and parental representation and also seek a more detailed definition of the term 'parental involvement'. In addition, they called for a strengthening of the functions of parent councils; an effective complaints system; and a National Parent Forum.  Finally, the SCC would like to see a wider discussion and debate over the balance of decision-making power within Scottish schools.

Enterprise & Culture Committee
Last week's meeting focused on broadcasting, with the Committee hearing from BBC Scotland and Ofcom regarding internal reviews of the BBC and the Ofcom review of public service broadcasting respectively.

The Committee had previously raised its concerns with the BBC reviews in Scotland and Ken McQuarrie, Controller of BBC Scotland, submitted a paper to the Committee updating them on progress.  In it he noted that talks between BBC Scotland and trade unions regarding the reviews are ongoing and have been constructive.  In terms of governance, his paper makes it clear that BBC Scotland has made it clear that the new BBC Trust being proposed by the Government's green paper should have Scottish representation.  On programming, he noted the need to increase the quality, depth and range of BBC Scotland services.  He also outlined his plans for regional news services to complement, not replace the existing services.  Finally, he outlined BBC Scotland's strategy for its contribution to broadcasting in Scotland which seeks to establish Scotland as a centre of excellence for drama and comedy, as it has already for children's programming.  MSPs still have concerns about the quality of programming.

Jeremy Peat from BBC Scotland assured MSPs that there would be a new training regime in place by next year to improve the reporting of political issues, recognising the nuances of devolution.

Ofcom's evidence centred on the digital switchover and its aim to establish a secure environment for the future of public service programming in Scotland, with minimum requirements for regional news and non-news programmes from Scottish and Grampian TV and the development of a dedicated Gaelic digital channel.  Members asked about the impact of the digital switchover on disadvantaged areas and on those with disabilities. The paper presented to the Committee also noted that Ofcom's audit of the nations and regions will produce an interim report in early 2006.

The Committee also considered a draft report for its inquiry into the Budget Process 2006-07 in private. A further draft will be discussed at its next meeting.

In addition, the Committee agreed its report on the Financial Memorandum of the Police, Public order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill.  The key findings of the report are that the total cost of the Bill amounts to £2,845,000.  There was a significant discrepancy between the Executive and COSLA’s costings in relation to public processions.  The Committee was extremely concerned that when asked to address this disparity, the Executive indicated that key documents which will clarify the intended ambit of the Bill - and thereby its costs - are still subject to consultation and development.

The Committee was also concerned that the Executive’s estimated cost savings associated with mobile fingerprinting are simplistic and flawed. The £2 million estimate figure relies on assumptions about the number of occasions on which police time will be freed up and believes it should not be seen as delivering efficiencies, but rather, as adding value to police capacity.

Health Committee
In a bid to gather evidence on the Abolition of NHS Prescription Charges (Scotland) Bill, some Members of the Committee visited Wales, where phased prescription charge abolition is underway with complete abolition due to come into force in 2007.  All Members in attendance, however, felt that there was little evidence available, due to the fact that the effects of the policy have yet to be seen.  Overall, the Committee concluded the trip wasn’t as useful as initially hoped.

The Committee took evidence on the Bill itself from two panels in a session which sparked intense debate and controversy among Committee members and witnesses alike.  In his opening statement the Deputy Minister stated that he and the Executive did not support the Bill because the goal of changing the prescription system is to decrease health inequalities and the Bill did not do this.  He further stated that the Executive will conduct a review next year to address inequalities in the prescription system.

Mike Rumbles (LD) immediately attacked the Deputy Minister’s statements.  Mr. Rumbles stated that a review was conducted by the Executive over two years ago and nothing came from it.  For this reason, he doubts the Executive will truly do something this time.  The Deputy Minister insisted he and the Executive would take swift action.

Some Members of the Committee (especially Mr Rumbles, Nanette Milne (CON) and Shona Robison (SNP)) expressed frustration with the Executive for letting the current prescription charge regime continue for so long without conducting a proper consultation.  They said right now they had two options - to keep the status quo, or to support this Bill.  They said it is better to support the Bill than let the unfair prescription scheme continue any further and that it is the Executive’s fault for making them pick between the lesser of two evils.

The Member in Charge of the Bill, Colin Fox (SSP), opened by stating that the Bill will improve the health of all Scots and will neither cause financial nor a resource strain on the NHS.  He claimed that Wales has abolished charges for people aged 16-25 and has seen negligible increases in prescription numbers.  It should be noted, though, that this age group is the least dependant upon the NHS and that, as age increases, dependency on the NHS and prescription increases greatly.

I made several points, one of which is that the lowest 10% income earners get 2.5 times more prescriptions than the top 10% but that both groups rely on the same number of GPs.  As a result, increased free prescriptions will add serious strain to GPs and other NHS resources.

Mr. Fox stated that the abolition of charges was very popular in Wales and that it was widely accepted.  I responded by pointing out that what is popular is not always right.

The Committee had no suggestions for the Deputy Health Minister on the Draft Smoking, Health and Social Care (Scotland) Act 2005 (Prohibition of Smoking in Certain Premises) Regulations 2006 except that the issue of the term "private vehicles" should be clarified.

Justice 2 Committee
The Committee continued examining the Police, Public order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, with evidence from Deputy Justice Minister, Hugh Henry.  There was broad consensus on the issue of football banning orders.  However, the Association of Chief Police Officers' call for 18 month mandatory sentencing for knife crime was not agreed to by the Committee.  It was pointed out that the Executive had supported an increase in sentencing for such crimes from 6 to 12 months and for more serious crimes from 2 to 4 years. There was general agreement that tougher sentences were necessary but an 18 month mandatory rule was and imprecise tool.  Jeremy Purvis (LD) reported back to the Committee on his visit to the Hibernian/Rangers Football match where he was invited to watch policing methods, he was apparently so taken with the policing that he was not aware of the score.

Subordinate Legislation Committee
The Committee considered the delegated powers in the Council Tax Abolition and Service Tax Introduction (Scotland) Bill.  The Local Government and Transport Committee (as the lead Committee on the Bill) has indicated the Bill does not have the support of the Non Executive Bills Unit because the proposals in the Bill do not meet its criteria because, in the view of the Unit, it is too complex for a Member's Bill.  It is understood that the Member in Charge has agreed to appear before the Committee to explain the delegated powers in the Bill.