成人快手

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 22 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3360 contributions

|

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 25 November 2025

John Mason

I totally agree that that is the aim, and that is where we should be. I am just a bit concerned that we have strayed away from that, at least in some inquiries, and the process has become much more鈥攁nd the public see it much more鈥攍ike a court of law, with one side arguing their case and one side arguing the other case.

Let us turn to the issue of recommendations. You have explained a little bit how the recommendations from an inquiry are put into place. Do you think that we need more of a structure for that? Should there be a Parliament committee to look at that? Alternatively, subject committees could look at different inquiries. Does there need to be more of a process in that regard?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 25 November 2025

John Mason

I move on to something completely different. The 2005 act has been mentioned a few times. Do we have complete freedom to change that or introduce a new law, or are we in any way bound by the 2005 act?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 25 November 2025

John Mason

Would that be independent legislation to change the 2005 act, even though it is reserved?

Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]

Scottish Public Inquiries (Cost-effectiveness)

Meeting date: 25 November 2025

John Mason

Okay鈥擨 will leave it at that.

Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]

Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

John Mason

The member expresses some doubt in her remarks, but does she think that there are enough teachers willing to volunteer to get all the kids who should be going on courses to go?

Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]

Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

John Mason

I am interested to hear what the member in charge of the bill has to say on that area, especially in relation to her amendments 13 and 14, which are in the next group. It is about making it as far as reasonably practicable. One of the reasons that it might not be practicable for a school to send kids on a residential trip is that no teachers, or not enough teachers, are volunteering. I raise that as a question, and I am interested to hear what the member has to say.

Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]

Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

John Mason

I do not wish to labour the point, but would not having enough volunteer teachers in a school for a trip be one of those reasonable reasons?

Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]

Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

John Mason

I did not realise that we were proceeding quite so quickly, convener.

Following my intervention on Pam Duncan-Glancy, I continue to struggle to see how the proposals would work in practice. As the member said, teachers are under a lot of pressure, and concerns have been raised by the unions that, if the proposals move on to a statutory footing and if there is a large increase in the number of young people going on residential trips, that will change the whole nature of them.

I totally support the idea of teachers volunteering, which works at the moment. With a bit of extra money, we could build on that.

However, if we bring the proposals into legislation, it would be very difficult to maintain the idea of voluntarism.

Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]

Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

John Mason

It seems to me be a bit of a challenge to tie these two things together: if a school is required to send all its children away on a trip and, in an extreme case, no teachers are willing to volunteer for the trip, how will that work? Would the amendment not lead to destroying the purpose of the bill?

Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]

Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

John Mason

I fully support the bill鈥檚 aims. I hope that I have made that clear in the past, and I certainly want to do so again. The idea of young people going on an outdoor residential course is absolutely tremendous; indeed, most of us will have benefited from doing so at some time.

My primary concerns about the bill were the costs. Perhaps unusually, I was the one who thought that the money should be targeted, and it was a Conservative member鈥擫iz Smith鈥攚ho felt that it should be a universal benefit. However, I think that we have reached a better place now.

I lodged my amendments in this group to get the ball rolling on the finance side of things before I had seen any of the others. In particular, I am happy with amendment 15, as it would continue the present arrangement whereby parents who can afford it pay for their children鈥檚 experiences. That is absolutely right; with money being tight, we cannot afford to have the Government paying for absolutely everyone when some people can afford it.

Therefore, I am more than happy to go along with amendment 15, which I think largely supersedes what I was trying to do. I was looking to use PEF money to top up what is already happening. I still wonder whether that could have happened without the bill, but the fact is that we are going ahead with the bill, and I know that the minister has reservations about specifically mentioning the PEF.

I am still a bit uncertain as to how much money the Government will end up paying for all of this, and I do wonder whether we will get a revised financial memorandum. Liz Smith and I are both on the Finance and Public Administration Committee. It seems that, if all the amendments鈥攐r at least some of them鈥攇o through, it will make quite a difference to the original costs relating to the bill. My understanding is that there can be, or should be, a revised financial memorandum after stage 2, and I will be interested to see whether that happens.