Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Criathragan Hide all filters
Displaying 1069 contributions
|
Public Audit Committee
Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”
Meeting date: 9 December 2021
Craig Hoy
If the census had gone ahead in 2021, there would have been costs for Covid-19 mitigations. Do you have a view on what those additional expenses might have been? Would you have expected NRS to have quantified those costs?
Public Audit Committee
Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”
Meeting date: 9 December 2021
Craig Hoy
You referred to £1.5 million-worth of financial pressures, which you said had been reduced to £0.5 million by mitigating actions. What were those actions? Are they continuing? Are you certain that those actions will bring balance in the coming financial year?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Made Affirmative Procedure Inquiry
Meeting date: 7 December 2021
Craig Hoy
I will backtrack a bit. Is there a contradiction or tension between the necessity for emergency legislation to be urgent and of significant importance, and the fact that it gets the least, or a limited, amount of scrutiny? One example, to which Ms Ross might have been alluding, is the recent Covid passport scheme regulations, which were before this committee. As a new member of the committee, I was concerned that, although the regulations might have been framed exactly as they should have been, the policy to which they gave effect was sadly deficient. The passport did not prove that the person who presented it was the person to whom the passport had been issued, so there was an element of possible impersonation. In addition, when we introduced lateral flow tests to the scheme, it did not involve proof that a person had had a negative test; they could simply declare themselves negative, whether or not they had had the test.
The question that I am getting at is this: how do we manage the tension between the debate that is held and what seems to be an absence of scrutiny, both of the detail of the made affirmative instrument and, more importantly, of the policy to which it gives effect? How do we manage that tension between the debate and the lack of scrutiny when the legislation comes forward?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Made Affirmative Procedure Inquiry
Meeting date: 7 December 2021
Craig Hoy
Do you foresee that there would be more recourse to the courts as a result of continued application of the made affirmative procedure if we carried on in these circumstances? Would that be a route that industry would look to utilise if Parliament is not effectively scrutinising instruments or holding the Executive to account for those laws?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Made Affirmative Procedure Inquiry
Meeting date: 7 December 2021
Craig Hoy
Dr Fox, I have a question about the differences between the ways in which Holyrood and Westminster look at such instruments. We were able only to ensure that the Covid passport regulations were soundly framed; we could not dig deeper into the policy, although some members of the committee thought that that was defective and deficient. How does that differ at Westminster? Would those who were looking at the instrument also look into the policy, or would they look only at how the legislation is framed?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Made Affirmative Procedure Inquiry
Meeting date: 7 December 2021
Craig Hoy
Do you see merit or benefit in giving a committee such as this one or the group of parliamentarians who look at the regulations some authority also to probe the impact of the policy? Should that committee or group consider not only whether the regulation or instrument is well drafted, but ensure that it leads to good outcomes when it is applied in policy terms? Is there merit in bringing those two functions together within the same group?
Public Audit Committee
Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of NHS National Services Scotland”; and “Personal protective equipment”
Meeting date: 2 December 2021
Craig Hoy
I want to drill down a little into the longer-term approach that is being taken to PPE supply and demand and perhaps capture how you are working with partners to develop capacity for on-going normal needs and for another pandemic, should that occur. This question might be for Mary Morgan. How has NHS NSS learned from the process that it has just been through? I am not necessarily asking about what you have learned. What processes have you gone through to capture learning and how are you ensuring that what you have learned is baked into future planning?
Public Audit Committee
Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of NHS National Services Scotland”; and “Personal protective equipment”
Meeting date: 2 December 2021
Craig Hoy
How do you balance the need for the stockpile with the costs? I assume that the products in question are perishable. Are you moving towards more of a just-in-time ordering system, or is having a stockpile important? I am bearing in mind the fact that the absence of such a stockpile was criticised at the beginning of the pandemic.
Public Audit Committee
Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of the Crofting Commission”
Meeting date: 2 December 2021
Craig Hoy
In your opening statement, you said that Covid was the cause of the problem, in effect. However, I am getting the impression that there was a latent dysfunction that came to a head during Covid. Is that the right way of characterising the situation?
Public Audit Committee
Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of the Crofting Commission”
Meeting date: 2 December 2021
Craig Hoy
Looking forward, there will need to be an effort to rebuild trust. How are you going to do that, Mr Mathieson?
