The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) welcomes the invitation to provide comments to the all-party Consultative Steering Group (CSG) on how the Scottish Parliament will operate. The PCS, through our predecessor unions CPSA and PTC, have been long standing supporters of establishing a Scottish Parliament. The democratic deficit that exists in Scotland was, perhaps, felt more keenly by our members as they are at the cutting edge of Scottish politics in their role as deliverers of government policy.

Introduction

The PCS is the largest civil service union both in Scotland and UK as a whole. We represent 260,000 workers in Britain and around 30,000 civil servants in the departments, executive agencies, non-departmental public bodies and some privatised areas across Scotland. In particular PCS represents 12,000 workers in areas which will come under the direct control of the Scottish Parliament when it commences its work, particularly in the administrative and managerial grades. Those areas include:-

The Scottish Office (and all of its component parts)

The Scottish Courts Service Agency

Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal's Service

Registers of Scotland Executive Agency

Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency

The Forestry Commission

Highlands and Islands Airports Limited

Highlands and Islands Enterprise

Scottish Enterprise

Scottish Natural Heritage

Scottish Screen

Scottish Agricultural Colleges

Scottish Council for Educational Technology

Scottish Prison Service Agency

National Museums of Scotland

National Galleries of Scotland

National Library of Scotland

Scottish Records Office

General Records Office

Historic Scotland Executive Agency

The PCS will have a major role to play in ensuring a successful structure for the Scottish Parliament is established. At the time of the publication of the White Paper 'Scotland's Parliament' we publicly welcomed the clear commitment made to the civil servants in Scotland and the promise civil servants will remain part of the home civil service and therefore subject to the provisions of the Civil Service Management Code. The White Paper states the staffing arrangements for supporting the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive "should reflect the highest standards of public service: integrity, political impartiality, objectivity, accountability, recruitment on the basis of fair and open competition and promotion on merit". These aims accord exactly with that of the PCS.

As PCS we have a vast wealth of experience in carrying out and delivering decisions made by the Westminster Parliament. We have the ability to put forward our expert views as an interested party in the lead-up to the parliament and also as the biggest civil service union. We will be an important player in determining how the bureaucracy of the parliament will actually work.  

We wish to play a constructive role in that process and work in partnership with both the Westminster and Scottish Parliaments and are pleased to be able to put our views forward to the consultative steering group, as the first part of this process. Obviously, there are some structural issues which we will have to go into in greater depth at a later date. We believe that the appropriate time and place for those discussions will be with Scottish Office management once the foundations of the Scottish Parliament and Executive have been agreed.

The Four Key Principles

The PCS welcomes the four key principles suggested by the Consultative Steering Group and believes they can form a fundamentally sound basis for a Scottish Parliament and Executive. However, getting the principles right is only the beginning, getting the policies in place to make the principles a reality is where many of the difficulties lie. The remainder of this document attempts to answer the questions the CSG have posed, where necessary adding some additional comments which may fall outside the suggested remit and even posing some questions of our own. Obviously some matters we have raised fall under a number of different areas, but we have included such points in our submission where we believe they are of most relevance.

Sharing the Power

An integral part of the Westminster democratic process is enabling the public to raise issues of concern through their constituency MP e.g. via local surgeries etc. That process will continue as the majority of the Scottish Members of Parliament (SMP) are to be elected in a similar way. This will also be enhanced by the government's proposals to ensure an element of proportionality is also used in electing SMPs. This change in the electoral system should ensure that those constituents who feel distanced from the electoral process due to their member of parliament holding differing political views to them should have somebody in the wider constituency to reflect their views. This will help bring parliament closer for those individuals who felt themselves to be previously excluded.

In addition to the benefits of reforming the electoral system in creating a new parliament it is essential that there is an effective democratic framework within which channels of communication are incorporated into the system, making dialogue between elected members and the public a fundamental feature. Vital to the success of the democratic apparatus is ensuring the public are aware of all the avenues open them. If the new system is to be pluralistic, then however well intentioned it might be, drawing up lists of groups to be included, may only succeed in excluding sections of the community. Ensuring the parliament is accountable, attentive, dynamic, responsive and not a faceless bureaucracy may prove more effective in engaging wider community participation.

The parliament should endeavour to be modern, efficient, understandable and relevant to the people it serves. Therefore some of the arcane rights and language (I spy Strangers!) still inherent in the Westminster model should not be incorporated into a fresh parliament. For example 'The Opera Hat', the rule requiring MPs to be seated and covered when trying to raise a point of order, the convention of the most senior MPs and Privy Counsellors having a traditional right of precedence in debates, should not feature in the new parliament. Such practices not only lead to certain MPs, such as former Cabinet ministers, dominating major debates, (leaving newer MPs having to wait to be called even if they have a special expertise which might make their contribution more valuable), but also distances parliament from the vast majority of the public.

There should also be strict action taken against SMPs who behave in a rowdy manner when another is speaking. Barracking of opposing SMPs should not be allowed, and the speaker should apply time limits to speeches in more debates. However, to encourage lively debate extra time should be allowed for interventions from SMPs. As Westminster tries to modernise itself, it would be wholly inappropriate for the new Scottish Parliament to adopt obscure, irrelevant procedures.

Scotland's diversity must also be reflected in the new constitutional arrangements i.e. the Parliament must represent the interests of the whole of Scotland and not just those residing in the Lothian region. Therefore there is a necessity for effective liaison machinery between Edinburgh and the rest of Scotland ensuring the people of Scotland do actually have a greater say over their own affairs. It must be remembered that the recent local government changes in Scotland created a certain amount of confusion over responsibility issues. Consequently, departmental responsibility must be clearly defined if the people of Scotland are to benefit from these constitutional changes.

New working arrangements will clearly be required to ensure that all parts of Scotland's communities can be involved in the democratic process, including the PCS. We would hope that the Scottish Parliament would want to work with the PCS in a partnership approach. The White Paper states: "All staff working in the new structure will continue to have access to trade union membership. The existing civil service unions will continue to be recognised for collective bargaining purposes and the present consultative arrangements and structures operating in the Scottish Office and its Associated Departments and Agencies will be adjusted where necessary to take account of the new arrangements". Whilst we welcome this commitment we hope the reality will go beyond this and embrace the PCS as social partners and the key deliveries of the parliament's policies. Later on in the paper we highlight how such social partnership could work in practice and would be interested to hear the CSG's response.

Accountability

In the British Civil Service civil servants have a responsibility for executing the decisions taken by Parliament, this will also clearly be the case in a Scottish Parliament. It must be recognised that by devolving responsibility to the Scottish Parliament without increasing dramatically the number of senior civil servants (Permanent Secretaries etc) will result in key executive decisions being taken at lower grades than has traditionally been the case, (particularly if there are a limited number of Scottish Departments). While we would encourage public scrutiny in the decisions of the civil service, who are after all administering the spending of the publics' taxes, we would sound a note of caution that those held accountable to the parliament must be at a reasonably high level of the civil service. (This point will obviously need greater clarification when the departmental structure of the Scottish Executive is decided.)

Clearly when considering questions of accountability it is the Ministers and Members of the Scottish Parliament who are ultimately responsible for their policy decisions and legislation. The PCS believes the Scottish Parliament has a unique opportunity to clear up much of the confusion that arose under the last government over the split between Ministerial policy decisions and civil service operational decisions. Too often it appeared that Ministers and Secretaries of State were hiding behind civil servants' operational decisions, even though they had clearly influenced the final decision. Obviously we are not arguing that the Scottish Executive is responsible for every decision that is taken by civil servants, however where there is clear Ministerial responsibility we would expect those elected to admit some culpability.

Further, in the aftermath of the Nolan Enquiry it is quite clear that a code of conduct will be required for members of the new Scottish Parliament. There has to be arrangements put in place for the registration of member's interests and, whilst lobbying is a necessary part of any democracy, this process must be subject to public scrutiny.

Accessible, Open Responsive

The machinery of the new parliament must be efficient. It must be clear what functions each department undertakes and who has overall responsibility. The mistakes and confusion that exist between some of the existing departments must be avoided in Scotland.

Freedom of Information

To enable constructive and informed debate there should be a number of information relays set up around the country. These information outlets would provide not only published information on the structure of the new Scottish Parliament but would also incorporate staff with a knowledge of constitutional issues. The many European information relays set up around the country are frequently utilised by the different sectors of Scottish society e.g. business, legal and academic. It would seem logical to incorporate the Scottish Information relays into the same institutions currently used by the European relays. These are hosted mainly in university and public libraries.

Freedom of Information must be guaranteed so that the people of Scotland have a general right of access to information held by the government. An effective Freedom of Information Act (FOI) will lead to a more informed public discussion on policy, greater testing of the facts before decisions are taken and more opportunity for outside experts, such as trade unions, to scrutinise data previously available only to government insiders. A FOI Act may be of particular value to the individual. It may help people learn what is recorded on personal files about them, and correct damaging errors. It should require authorities to publish the internal guidance used by officials, so that people check for example, that their planning application is being dealt with in accordance with proper procedures. Information about developments affecting the local community may become available earlier, providing greater opportunity to influence them. Information alone may not be enough to influence such matters, but it is always a basic prerequisite. FOI may even cut costs, helping to expose waste or the implausibility of dubious projects. However, whether or not these benefits occur, the justification of FOI is axiomatic. What the government does is not its own affair. It is the public's business, done on the populace's behalf, and the public are entitled to know about it. This may help bring about public confidence in the government. However, information relating to national security should not be disclosed if that would cause substantial harm.

Departmental Structures

We have noted above that the way the Scottish executive operates on a multi-departmental basis will have wide ranging implications concerning the effectiveness of devolution in Scotland. If people do not perceive that power is being brought closer to them or are confused about where the power lies this will be damaging to the reputation of the Scottish Parliament.

The Scottish Office is currently broken down into five departments:

·  Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries Department,

·  Health Department

·  Home Department

·  Development Department

·  Education and Industry Department, and

In addition the Scottish Office also has responsibility for: Central Services, embracing the Information Directorate, Establishment and Finance Divisions.

Clearly among this list there are some marriages of convenience, for example: the Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries Department and there are also very varied areas of responsibility within other departments, such as the Development Department, which includes within its remit: housing, area regeneration, local government, transport, European funding, statistics, historic buildings and ancient monuments.

In addition devolution will mean additional responsibilities currently held by the Cabinet Office and Treasury in Whitehall will fall within the remit of the Scottish Parliament.

On the face of it, it may appear breaking down every department into their separate responsibilities is the ideal way to respond to the demands of devolved government. However the PCS believes that in practice, given the size of the assembly, the number of civil servants that will be available and considerations of economies of scale, mean that in practice such fragmentation would be unworkable. It will therefore be necessary to review thoroughly the areas of responsibility the parliament will have and the existing arrangements that are in place at present to determine the best balance that can be achieved in the size and make up of the departments to make them as accessible, open and responsive as possible. The PCS would envisage that the final process will result in around eight to ten departments, based on similar divisions to those currently in place in the Scottish Office. (Obviously whilst we would favour this approach, whatever approach is accepted the PCS will be more than happy to comment on the make up and divisions of the proposed departments.)

The government have committed themselves to providing a seamless service throughout the UK and there is no reason why this model cannot be applied to Scotland also. Therefore to the public it should be irrelevant the final number of departments the Scottish Parliament has. The mistakes and confusions that exist between some of the existing departments must not be repeated in the Scottish Parliament. The recent example of the Scottish Office's Education and Industry Department clash with the Department of Health over giving medicine to school children must not be repeated. We outline below proposals on committee structures that should mean this does not occur under a Scottish Parliament.

Committee Structures:

The PCS have considered the question of committees to hold the Scottish Executive to account and scrutinise its decisions, and believes that a model based on combining the standing and select committees in the Westminster parliament (with some refinements) is the most appropriate for the Scottish Parliament. In our opinion having a combined standing and select committee shadowing each department enables expertise on issues to be developed by the committee's membership and continual monitoring of a specific department's activities.

As in the Westminster model such committees should not only examine new legislation but also hold the Scottish Executive and Ministers accountable to parliament. Where issues occur that fall across committee boundaries we see no reason why each of the committees should not examine the relevant parts to their committee. Too often in the Westminster Parliament issues have slipped through without comment, because they have not been of direct relevance to the committee examining the subject.

We also recognise that (initially at least) there maybe problems with the way the departments work both with each other and the parliament, therefore we would recommend establishing a Select Committee similar to Westminster's Public Administration Select Committee. In July 1997 the Committee was given power 'to consider matters relating to the quality and standards of administration provided by civil service departments, and other matters relating to the civil service' (a task which was undertaken in previous Parliaments by a sub-committee of the Treasury Committee and the former Public Services Committee). Such a committee could also examine many of the questions raised in both this and the CSG's paper and even look at deciding the legislative agenda for each session of parliament.

Therefore, as a minimum, we would recommend a Scottish Public Administration Select Committee has responsibility for overseeing that each of the four key principles of the Consultative Steering Group are adhered to in the operation of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Executive.

Finally, (as part of our proposals to modernise government and make it more accessible to the public), we would encourage that a new name is found for select committees. As Vacher's 'Handbook of House of Commons Procedure' states the title of 'Select Committee' is "rather confusing".

It should be noted all the above comments on committees and their structures do not cut across the importance of ministers accounting to the parliament direct.

Staffing

The PCS also notes that with the increased responsibilities a Scottish Parliament brings this will also lead to an increased workload for the civil servants responsible for carrying out and delivering the parliament's policies. Whilst we welcome the government's recognition in the White Paper that there may need to be an increase in staffing over and above the current Scottish Office staff numbers to deal with some of these new responsibilities (such as the Cabinet Office and HM Treasury) we still have concerns regarding the overall number of civil servants in Scotland.

It will be crucial to not only the success of the parliament but also how it is perceived by the people in Scotland and Britain that there are enough civil servants to carry out its many and varied responsibilities. We note that while the White Paper stated; 'the establishment of a Scottish Parliament will not create a large additional bureaucracy' if the staff of the Scottish Executive are seen as over stretched and unable to cope with the increased workload this will sent out a clear message that devolution does not appear to be working.

We accept that there are clear cost constraints placed on the Scottish Parliament (and the civil service as a whole) and they will operate along similar lines to the existing arrangements for financing the Scottish Office. However, we must not forget that on the whole it is remote central government that is being devolved to Scotland. If we accept one of the basis objectives of the exercise is to get power closer to the people then it is essential that there are staff resources made available to meet that need.

Legislation

We have stated above that we are keen to be seen as social partners and we believe this is an area where we can help, via a partnership approach.

In dealing with the question of pre-legislative scrutiny, PCS agrees with the concept that the agenda for legislation should not just be set by the individuals within the new parliament but include as many sections of Scottish society as possible.

Further, in our experience, as representatives of workers in the public sector, we regularly come across clear examples of problems which exist because of existing legislation. There should be a system which enables us, and other interested parties, to forward views to rectify problems; in effect generating problem solving legislation from within the Scottish Executive.

Equal Opportunities

In Scotland, as in many other industrial countries, the workforce can be divided by many differences such as sex, age and race. To be treated and judged as a unique individual should be a fundamental right for each one of us. However, every day people are pre-judged or misjudged according to preconceptions about their race, colour, sex, sexuality, disability or other irrelevant factors. Each time this happens not only does an individual suffer unfair discrimination but an employer risks losing the opportunity of employing or promoting a better employee. Discrimination of this kind not only diminishes the person affected but impoverishes the wider community.

PCS therefore believes that the equal opportunities policy enshrined in the 'Civil Service Management Code' (CSMC) should be fully embraced by the Scottish Parliament. The code provides that all eligible people must have "equally of opportunity for employment and advancement on the basis of their suitability for the work. There must be no unfair discrimination on the basis of age, disability, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, race, colour, nationality, ethnic or (in Northern Ireland) national origin."

The Code in addition sets out the following points:

·  Equal opportunities policy should be made known to al staff and potential applicants for employment. Staff must be made clear of their rights and responsibilities in relation to the implementation of such a policy, and staff should be provided with a working environment which is free from unfair discrimination and harassment. (CSMC para 2.1.4)

·  Procedures must be in place for handling complaints of unfair discrimination and harassment, and these procedures must be made known to all staff. All such complaints must be handled promptly and appropriately. (CSMC para 2.1.5)

·  To monitor the effectiveness of the equal opportunities policy data must be collected on the age, gender, ethnic origin, disability etc of staff and applicants. This data could then be used to monitor and analyse staff in post and the effects on each group of key personnel procedures, including recruitment, career development, promotion, job allocation, resignations, personal review, salary, performance pay, and access to opportunities for training and personal development. (CSMC para 2.1.6.)

·  An equal opportunities officer must be employed to have overall responsibility for the implementation of the equal opportunities policy and for monitoring and reviewing progress as specified. Individual managers should also be held accountable for achieving progress within their own staff. (CSMC para 2.1.9)

The design of the Scottish Parliament can help achieve the above aims, by ensuring within the structure of the new parliament the scope for discrimination is minimised.

Obviously we would not want to repeat the mistakes of the Westminster Parliament of all night sittings and irregular hours. This is not only disadvantages those MPs with family responsibilities, but also those members of staff who have to remain present while the House is sitting, whether they be providing secretarial support, writing for Hansard or security. Also the question of whether MPs can make good decisions at 6am cannot be discounted.

Therefore, we expect a modern parliament to keep regular hours and to take the lead in ensuring that facilities are available to both staff and elected representatives to make equal opportunities a reality.

Summary

PCS consider consultation exercises to be the best way forward in establishing best practice for the new parliament. However, established arrangements for interchange with other government departments should remain in place as should present arrangements governing movement between the Scottish Office and its associated departments and agencies. These arrangements will give the Scottish Executive the support of a tried and tested civil service machine, and access to a wide body of knowledge. The decision to keep the staff of the Scottish Executive as members of the home civil service will also be beneficial in fostering good relationships between Whitehall and Edinburgh.

If the Scottish Executive is to function effectively, then the Scottish Office will have to be staffed properly, this will inevitably mean a staff increase. There will be a need to develop separate Scottish policies on topics where Whitehall departments do the bulk of the work at present. There will also be an additional workload involved in responding to the questions which the 129 members of parliament will regularly ask in the interests of their constituents.