 Good morning and welcome to the eighth meeting in 2017 of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee. Can I remind members please to switch off all electronic devices? At the start of the committee, I would like to express condolences to the family and friends of everyone who is affected by the atrocious events in London yesterday. I am sure that I speak on behalf of all the members of the committee in that respect. I would also like to pay tribute to Claire Hawkey, as I believe that this will be her final meeting of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, as a motion has been lodged on committee changes. I want to thank Claire for her service to the committee during the course of her term on here. Agenda item 1 is consideration of cross-party groups. Our first item today is for the committee to take evidence on a proposed cross-party group on social science. I would like to welcome Daniel Johnson MSP to the other side of the table this morning. I would like the proposed convener of the CPG to make an opening statement. Thank you very much convener. It is a pleasure to be sitting this side of the committee table, albeit slightly intimidating. I propose to make a lengthy statement, but let me try to give you my elevator pitch of why I think that this cross-party group is worth having. First and foremost, I think that we all know of the importance of academia and universities to Scottish public life. I think that social sciences within academia are particularly important. Indeed, I think that they are particularly useful to us as policymakers, because I think that what social sciences are about are about applying scientific methods to social phenomenon. I think that this is a group that could be of particular use and usefulness to our work in this place. I think that we are also helped by having a lot of interest from key figures within the social sciences in Scotland and, indeed, key groups. I think that that is reflected by what is quite a healthy group enlisting of external members. We have also got an enthusiastic secretariat in the form of the campaign for social sciences in Nick Bibby. We are proposing a varied and interesting set of topics to look at. Our overall approach is to look at that evidence-based scientific approach to looking at social phenomenon and, indeed, policy issues, which I think will be of interest. Things that we are discussing are things such as the nature of productivity, how to understand that, the impact of automation, a rights-based approach to policy, how sustainability can be better embedded in policy, and also a better understanding of what the workforce actually looks like and what jobs people are doing in Scotland. In short, I think that this is a CPG that should make a useful and interesting contribution to our work in this place. Importantly, what we seek to do is hold meetings and events, which draw in a broad interest from members right the way across the chamber, whether they are members of the CPG or not. Thank you, Mr Johnson. Can I open up to questions from the committee, Mr Stewart? Thank you, convener. Mr Johnson, I think that it is a very laudable approach that you are taking with reference to this cross-party group. In the information that you have given us, you have talked about policy areas and you have also talked about policy topics. I think that that is the right way to challenge it and take it forward. There is so much that you could deal with that you may have to try and manage as you go forward how you take on board. If you start to look at some area, it may extend and you may end up going down one channel for a few meetings to try and manage that. However, I would like to think about how you would work with other cross-party groups that are doing similar things and liaise with them to ensure that you get the broad base. I am delighted with the number of individuals and organisations that you have taken on board already. That shows that there is a meaningful opportunity for things to progress, but it is the relationship that you will have with other groups that I am more interested about. I think that that is absolutely right. First and foremost, I think that this is about an interface between policy makers and social scientists. That is a valuable role, but it is always going to be by definition broad. In our initial meeting, we were discussing the topic of homelessness and the possibility of holding a joint meeting with the CPG for homelessness. That is a good example. I think that we are very much interested in looking at where those overlaps exist. More importantly, we are looking at the work that other CPGs are doing and maybe offering them the perspective that social scientists may bring for providing alternative, refreshed and new perspectives on the topics that they are looking at. It is just a point of clarification. Mr Johnson, you have noted that Nick Bibby, from the campaign for social science, provides the secretariat, but I do not see that group on the organisations that are members of the cross-party group. Is that a clerical error? I think that that is just a clerical error, so apologies for that. I will get that amended. To be clear, you said that you acknowledge in the briefing paper that you will be overlapping on other cross-party groups the remits of other cross-party groups. Will you be seeking to actively be involved in their remits or will you be seeking to avoid duplication of what they are discussing in terms of sustainability and demand on speakers? I think that the key to it is being mindful of what other CPGs look at and what their interests are. I do not think that we should either actively seek nor avoid. The key thing is about being driven by the discussion between policymakers and academics in the field of social science, seeing where the key areas of interest are, and maybe highlighting areas that social science can provide perspective. I think that being mindful of when those topics are overlapping and therefore making those approaches to CPGs is about being mindful of what we are looking at and who else might be looking at those issues. I thank Mr Johnson for his attendance this morning. The committee will consider whether to approve the application at the next agenda item and you will be informed of our decision as quickly as possible after that. I will suspend briefly. We now move to agenda item 2 for the committee to consider whether to accord recognition to the proposed cross-party group on social science. Is the committee all agreed to do so? Thank you very much. Mr Johnson will be informed of that decision as quickly as possible. I now move the committee into private session.