 Mwendol. Welcome to this 7th meeting of session 6 of the Standards, Procedure and Public Appointments Committee. Cymru, I say good morning to the committee members and indeed witnesses who are joining us later. Agender item 1 is to agree whether or not we can take item 5 in private. This is a consideration and an ongoing discussion about the committee's work programme. I was a committee happy to take agenda item 5 in private. I think we're in agreement with that. Pa gyd yw'r gwahynnig o garth ble'uw caiff ac dypaid gael gwahinnig, the first group that we're going to meet today is a Proposed CPG on the creative economy. I'd like to welcome Claire Baker who's the convener of Proposed Group to the meeting. Claire, would you like to make a short statement about the intentions of the CPG please? Thank you, convener, and good morning to MSPs. The previous CPG on culture was established in 2013, i'r newid i gŵr i ddechrau 2013 ac i'r dd blocked a gŵr i'r sefynt. Mae'r daeth agnod gweld, yn curiwyr ar gyfer drwng ar gyfer, ac yn gweld i'r ddod, ac i'r ddod y byddai'r gwaith cael leiriau ar gyfer teimlo'r gawr o'r gyfer, mae'n gilydd i'ch bod yr olaen gwaith, sydd enghraifftu i'ch ffordd yr olygu yn gweld mewn ddiwyddiant i'r cyffredigol. Byddwn i'r cyffredig y difficultfion o gyd February Mo, fy rhan o weldi yn cyflinio ar gyfer the pressure that puts on MSP attendants, but to avoid creating CPs that were too specific, we are proposing to separate into two distinct groups. One would be based around publicly funded cultures such as libraries, museums, national performing companies and understood you took evidence from Sarah Boyack last week. The one I'm proposing this morning is based around the industrial sector or creative economy including publishing companies, record companies, entrepreneurs and so on, so the more commercial end of the sector.ser, y bydd hyn yn ymweltydol, ac mae'n ysgrifennu'r sector yn siwr yn ffocos cyffrediwrs ac yn y ddylanoedd. Mae yn credu fawr hun ydym wedi'u ffordd o'r mewn cyfrannu, ac mae'r d外f yn gefnog fel yn eu ffocos ym ni'n gwneud yn bwysig ac ar gwaith. The creative sector is of huge importance to Scotland's economy, with over 15,000 businesses employing over 70,000 people in addition to many freelancers. A creative industry contributes some £5 billion to the economy each year, and there are huge opportunities for increased productivity and growth. It is a sector that has been seriously impacted by the pandemic. As we emerge from that, there is a real need to focus on it, in particular in terms of the recovery, both in the short and the long term. I believe that there is value in establishing this CPG to advance these concerns. I welcome the committee previously agreed the formation of the group on culture and communities, and I hope that you are able to support this group this morning. Thank you very much, Clare. Can I open up to the committee members if anyone has any questions? I'm not getting an indication. As you said, Clare, we met the other CPG in a previous session. It's interesting to see the idea of such a wide area as culture being subdefined. Do you have any fears about that separation, or are you content that the idea of separating between the two or two groups of voices within culture will allow people to be heard that perhaps MSPs haven't been able to hear from? That is the intention. We did find when it was the one group that is such a broad sector that we could subdivide into 20 CPGs. By recognising the more creative community public sector-focused end of culture and recognising that there is also the more commercial industrial side of culture, it mirrors the Scottish Government's approach that it has a separate department for creative industries and a separate department for culture. We feel that it would give enough space within the meetings and engagement with MSPs to look at both sides of culture. We propose to work quite closely together. Rather than have each group having four meetings a year, the initial proposal is to have two meetings a year each. There is some crossover in membership, but there is some exclusive membership as well. Some people have particular interest in one angle or the other. That's very helpful. I thank you, Clare, for recognising the fact that there are a significant number of CPGs and that the workload commitments that that gives to MSPs. However, I think that it is refreshing to see that that has been considered within the in essence two applications, but particularly the one that you've presented today. Thank you. The committee will take its decision and the clerks will notify you of that decision in due course. I thank you for coming along this morning and wish you all well with the CPG if we are in agreement with it. Thank you, Clare. Can we suspend for a few minutes just to swap witnesses? Good morning again. The next group that we are going to consider is a proposed CPG on India, and I would like to welcome and invite Pam Gossel, who is the co-convener of the proposed group, to make a short statement about the intentions. Good morning. Thank you, convener, and good morning. Good morning to all the MSPs and staff. The cross-party group on India seeks to promote relationships between Scotland and India. The principle aim for our cross-party group is to work with organisations and authorities to strengthen cultural, educational and economic ties between our two countries. Given the size of Indian economy, forging a closer relationship with India has the potential to be extremely beneficial for our society, economy and development. That is the first cross-party group that is focused on India in the history of the Scottish Parliament. Indians and people of Indian heritage living in Scotland have contributed greatly to our communities, society and overall culture. Therefore, the cross-party group on India is a great opportunity to promote our common interests and shared heritage, and the perfect opportunity for our MSPs to meet with prominent dignitaries from the Indian community. I do not expect that the CPG will infringe on other groups. I believe that the CPG on India will bring great benefits economically and socially with Scotland and India together, and I hope today that the committee agrees on setting up registration for the CPG on India. I also would like to echo earlier on what was said about work loads. I have taken into account that there are many CPGs and there are obviously a lot of work loads, but also the fact that how important this is to building our economy after the pandemic and I have cross-party support on this group. Thank you. Thank you very much Pam. Do any members have any questions? No? As I was going to say, Pam, you do have a strong list of cross-party membership of the group, but I was just going to ask about the non-SMSP members of the group. I see that you have support of the consulate of India and PGP, company limited, who are they going to provide the secretariat support, is it? Yes, convener, PGP will provide that and the consulate of India will also provide us guidance, connections and links in relationship building on three of the areas, education, culture and trade. I hope that that will allow you to build on the very right intention of allowing access, experience and education to MSPs of a very important country, sub-continent, going forward. Absolutely. It is something, convener, that has been brought up in my portfolio working with universities and colleges. They are talking about how we make Scotland more attractive to the world and we bring in more students from all over the world. As you know, they are not just students, but we bring in exchange of knowledge and technology, which is fantastic for Scotland that we will have these relationships building. Excellent. Thank you very much for coming this morning. As you heard with the last one, the committee clerks will be in touch once the committee has taken its decision, but I hope that that will be a positive one. Can I thank you again for attending this morning? Thank you very much, convener, and thank you very much MSPs. The next group that we are going to consider is a proposed CPG on wellbeing economy. I would like to welcome Paul MacLennan, who is a member of this committee, who is going to be the convener of the proposed group. Paul, would you like to give the committee an explanation about the CPG that is being proposed? Good morning and thank you, convener. Just to refer members to my register of interests, I am a serving councillor in East Lothian Council. The stated purpose of the group is to increase understanding and delivery of a wellbeing economy, one that is a service in people and plan it to promote delivery of sustainable, fair and equal economic development across a range of interest areas, public, private and third sector, as well as local and national. I think that the thing with the wellbeing economy has an overview of various areas, including health, equalities, economy and sustainability areas. I think that we recognise that there is some crossover in CPGs regarding renewable energy carers, and I know that there was a proposed at the time when we put this in about the CPG and circular economy, which has obviously been improved around health and equalities. I think that we can work in conjunction with them and it is not in competing with them. I think that I suppose that the wider aspect, since being elected around about six months ago, we have heard many members from all parties talking about the want to move towards a wellbeing economy. I think that one of the purposes of the group is to try and increase understanding and delivery of what a wellbeing economy looks like. We have a wide range of participants in the group. The wellbeing alliance in Scotland is our secretariat, but we have membership from Scottish Enterprise, the UN House in Scotland and also the STUC. Since we submitted the form, we have had Queen Margaret University in Public Health Scotland join the group. As I said, I am willing to answer any questions, but I am looking forward to working with the group. Excellent. Thank you, Paul. Do any of the other committee members have any questions? I was just going to pick up something that you said there, Paul, about really what the definition of a wellbeing economy is. It is certainly a phrase that gets bandied around a lot, but when you start to dig beneath that, I think that people's understanding is very different and broad. Certainly looking at the wide number of non-MSP organisations that are going to be involved, it would certainly seem a beneficial way to try and reach consensus on what we mean, but more importantly move forward to reaching that. For the purposes of clarification, when we come to make a decision on the cross-party groups, Paul will step out of the committee and will not be part of that decision. Thank you for coming along this morning, Paul. Could we have a short suspension, please? The final group that we will consider today is the proposed CPG on social work, and I would like to welcome Fulton MacGregor, who is joining us remotely today, who is the proposed convener of this new group. Fulton, would you like to give a short explanation about the intentions of the group, please? I declare them an interest as an registered social worker with the Scottish Social Services Council prior to being elected in 2016. I worked as a social worker for around 12 years, firstly in childcare and protection and more laterally in community criminal justice social work. I would also like to say at the start of this, if you do not mind, I would like to thank Emily Galloway and Rob Burn from my office for all their work thus far in bringing this group together. The main aim of the proposed cross-party group on social work is to promote an understanding of the complexities of social work profession, bring together its voice and positively raise its profile. I believe that the establishment of this group is justified, as the social work profession is a single profession, very connected to, but separate from, say, social care and other health services. Social workers hold specific duties for welfare and have statutory powers to intervene where necessary across a range of areas. The governance and delivery of social work, as members will be aware, is spread across local authorities, the independent and third sector and health and social care partnerships. Because of that, it can often be challenging to bring together diverse experiences and voices to support and influence national policy and legislation. That is also seen by the fact that social work is covered across a variety of Government portfolios as well. In addition, there can be a lack of or a stereotypical even public understanding of the profession, often negatively perpetrated by the media. I ask colleagues to possibly think of the social worker in sole purpose who comes into people's houses and threatens to remove their children. Obviously, in my experience, and I'm sure others will know as well, it couldn't be further from reality, but nonetheless it is a perception that the public sometimes can have. I propose that this cross-party group will provide a space to collaboratively address issues and work towards solutions in the profession for people who use social work services, their families for communities and, of course, for social workers themselves. It will also seek to raise awareness of the profession and to raise its profile in a positive way to better enable the public to understand the key role that social workers play in people's lives. That becomes even more significant as Scotland moves towards establishing a national care service of which social work will likely play an integral part. Social work is a very interconnected profession and there are some overlards with existing cross-party groups, so we've had a wee look at that. However, like the committee structure in Parliament, there is no one group already existing that can provide the forums sought by the creation of this particular group. If approved today, some issues that the cross-party group will consider include the public perceptions of social work, the national care service, poverty, drug deaths and self-directed support. That is just to name a few. The group will be open to members across the chamber. I have already secured cross-party support and I hope to have inspiring speakers. I will invite relevant Government ministers regularly. As I have said before, a variety of Government ministers will be able to come along to the cross-party group, given the portfolio that is covered. Finally, I want to thank, by ending the Scottish Association of Social Work, Sazwa, who has been a driving force in getting to this stage. At her initial meeting, I have agreed to become the Secretary of State if the group is approved. I can assure the committee and the Parliament that, in Sazwa, they will have a very thorough and proactive Secretary of State for this cross-party group. Thank you, Fulton, for that very full and positive description. Sann Balb, you have a question? Yes, thank you. Good morning, Fulton McGregor. Thank you for the opening statement this morning. You partially answered my question towards the end of your opening statement because you dropped a request to speak in the chat box before you completed your presentation. I was looking, Fulton, at the range of organisations that you have signed up for the proposed cross-party group. They are pretty varied, and it made me think about that there are lots of different voices within the social work system. It is quite difficult, perhaps, for social work to speak with one voice or when they try to raise that voice in terms of policy development within Scotland, if some voices may get inadvertently squeezed out. I am just wondering your thoughts on the drug deaths crisis, the rational care service, active on-going policy areas. Do you think that the cross-party group would offer something to ensuring that the social work community has a strong voice at the heart of those policy developments? In terms of self-directed support, I sat on the committee that brought self-directed support in Scotland. There is probably a need for some post-legislative scrutiny in relation to how it is actually operating in practice. I would get that you are not a subject committee of the Parliament, but you think that there is a role for your cross-party group in teasing out some of the strengths and perhaps areas that need improved in relation to self-directed support. Sorry for the length of the question. I hope that you see it as a positive question because I am generally interested in the role that the cross-party group could play. I do not want to give you the chance to put some of that on the record this morning. Thank you, Bob Fulton. I appreciate the question, Bob, and I know that you have been a supporter of social work and related services throughout your time as an MSP and spoke regularly about that. I know the work that you do, and I like it very much in social work. I think that towards the end of the last term, Sazwa actually held some hustings that I attended on behalf of my party. All the political parties were represented at that, and one of the asks that they made through those hustings was that, because of the way the discussion was going, should the people who were there be re-elected, would they commit to the establishment of a cross-party group, which I committed to, as did others? However, they asked for that cross-party group came out after a very full and lengthy discussion about where social work actually sat within the Parliament. As you have said, because you have even talked about the self-directed support there, the drug crisis that we have, there are different social workers that would be involved in those areas, but social workers often have, as I said in the opening statement, the statutory powers over various areas, whether that be children, families, adult justice or adult social care. It has been really difficult to bring voices together. They have never really had a major voice through the committee structure, for example. Yes, social work organisations are invited to commit to committees that they do that regularly, but because, for example, the justice social worker would come under the justice committee that I sit on, the children and families social worker would be more looking at the education committee, and the ones in health and social care would be more looking at the health committee. It has been difficult to bring together a forum that maybe represents social workers the issues and dilemmas that they are facing, particularly through the pandemic, as we build back. I think that the cross-party group does all for that opportunity. The two issues that you mentioned will be very much at the forefront. As we are probably watching this committee meeting, I hope that it will be approved and already thinking about how those two become future agenda items. I absolutely and all members, whether they are current members of the group or not, would be welcome to come along to any meeting. I know that Tess White has a question for you, Tess. I notice that CPG has a broad and an important remit, and I also note that you have a very large selection of organisations that are going to contribute. They are varied from unison through to Children in Scotland and Sam H. I hope that that bodes well. My question, FMA, is that it is very broad. What are your own personal success factors? How will you know when you have got a good CPG in your own mind? Fulton, a very open question for you. What would be success with the CPG? Thanks, convener. Sorry, I was jumping in there to answer, convener. Apologies for that. I think that it is a big question. It is a good question from Tess. I suppose that, in the last term, I had the privilege of starting a cross-party group from scratch and going through this process. I believe that that cross-party group has been successful, the organisations that I attended regularly, and we have pulled together some work that we hope will help other MSPs to see what is going on in that sector. That is what I would hope for this as well. The discussions that I have had since that, that I have discussed with Sasswa, have been really thorough. I have a lot of faith in them. They are very committed to the group. I come from it. If the group is a proposed, I would be the convener following on from the initial meeting. I have a background in social work. As I said, I am very passionate about it, even during the term that I have been an MSP, I have maintained my registration as a social worker. I am very passionate to hear what is going on. I have connections to the profession outside of being an MSP. I have a lot of faith that it will be a successful cross-party group. However, in terms of the question test, I think that the big thing for me would be whether we are producing information material as a result of the cross-party group that is influencing policy and other MSPs in the Parliament chamber. That, for me, would be a big success. I just wanted to first note the thanks that you extended at the start to the others who have helped in this. Sometimes there are nameless people who are working very hard behind the scenes and CPGs, and we may need to find a way of recognising, but also just to highlight the two points that you brought up in your speech and also were contained in the purposes of the group, which is to allow a space to collaboratively address issues that cross so many fields. If I can also echo your phrase, it will also seek to raise awareness of the profession and to raise its profile in a positive way, which I think is much needed. Thank you for coming today. We will take a decision later and the clerks will notify you in due course, but can I thank you for your application and submission today, Fulton? Thank you. Committee, we are now going to move to agenda item 3, which is the cross-party group approval. As explained previously, Paul, who is a member of this committee and gave evidence to us this morning, is going to step outside of the committee and not take part in this decision. Agenda item 3 is for the committee to consider whether to accord recognition to the proposed cross-party groups on creative economy, India, well-being economy and the final one that we heard from on social work. Can I invite any comments from any of the committee members before I put a decision? Edward, would you like to make a point? Yes, convener. Thank you very much. I would just like to put on record that it is really difficult for us as a committee to look at each of the committees individually and not think that there is huge merit in all of them and all that they are trying to achieve. I would just like to place on record that I have concerns on the number of committees within the Parliament and the amount of time that MFPs stand to have to commit to fulfil their duties on committees. I know that Paul, a member of our committee, is on numerous committees for which I applaud him. However, I do think that there comes a stage where, as a committee, we need to consider what is reasonable and right. I am delighted that it is not for new committees on right, because it is an impossible task. However, I just have concerns about the amount of time that is being committed by MSPs. Thank you for that comment, Edward. I know that we have had discussions in other meetings regarding concerns over the quantity, if not the quality of CPGs, but also more importantly, as you say, the time commitment that is required. For CPGs to work as successfully, as I think Tessa's question managed to draw out with regard to the last one, MSPs have to be able to put the time into it, but that time commitment can very, very quickly run away. I know that, as a committee, we will be returning to this sooner, rather than later. Not with regard to individual CPGs, as you rightly mentioned, but as to the landscape in which the CPGs sit. Does anyone else have any comments? Are members agreed to a called recognition to the proposed cross-party groups on the creative economy, India, wellbeing economy and social work? Take that as an affirmative, and I am just going to invite Paul to come back into the committee meeting after the re-register, yes. Thank you, Paul. We now move to agenda item 4, which is cross-party groups who are seeking to re-register. Our item today is for the committee to consider a change of purpose for the proposed CPG on deafness, the proposed CPG on international development and the proposed CPG on Tibet. We are also going to consider a change of name and purpose for the proposed CPG on challenging racial and religious prejudice. As members are aware, any change of name or purpose by a group is required to be approved by this committee. Do any of the committee members have any comments on any item herein? Thank you. Do members agree that the proposed CPGs on deafness, international development, Tibet and challenging racial and religious prejudice can be re-registered in this new session? I find the committee in agreement with that. We are now moving to an item in private, so this will end the public part of the meeting. Thank you.