you used or that particular policy initiative, elected conveners for committees, I’m hoping that’s a shorthand for reform, but it is not a very good one if I may say so because elected conveners are not the answer. And not only are they not the answer, they’ve already been looked at, they’ve already been rejected by the previous standards committee.” While this specific reform does not attract his support, Macintosh is keen to underline the importance of “independence” within the confines of the committees. “Being a govern- ment backbencher is a tricky job as well,” he adds. “You don’t want to just be studiously supportive at all times, you want to have room to be your own person, but you can end up, for example, serving on multiple committees, not getting very much out of them because the minister will take all the credit and you’re doing a lot of the work, you can become com- mittee fodder effectively, and I don’t think that’s very constructive either. “I think there is very much potential in


that Macintosh does not envisage that ceasing. One of his first acts in the chair was to lift a ban on the use of mobile phones and tablets in the chamber, allowing MSPs to use Twitter and Facebook during debates. “My predecessor started off a process of reform for good reason. I think that we’re of an age as a parliament where we need to look again at ourselves, work out as an institution where we’re heading, because it would be very easy for us to become a shadow of the government, just to follow in their footsteps, and that’s not the job of parliament. So I am quite keen that we re-establish that identity.” What might that mean, specifically? Macintosh dismisses the suggestion of a second chamber – a reform his predecessor Tricia Marwick strongly advocated – repeating the word “no” four times as if there might be any uncertainty when asked if he’d like to see one. Elected conveners – another of Marwick’s proposals – attracts an equally dismissive response. “What’s happened in the last couple of months is that phrase


Photography by David Anderson


developing the role of independent-minded, strong voices from the committees in the backbenches and that means supporting our committees in their work, recognising the role of parliament itself in its own right, dis- tinguishing what happens here in parliament from what happens in the government and making sure the lines are clear, and there’s lots of ways of doing that.” In the spirit of looking across the political divide, Macintosh reveals he has already asked business managers of all parties to present a paper on what they want from the commit- tees before he takes a lead on negotiations to establish them. “Parliament should set up committees to reflect our priorities and therefore if, for example, there is going to be a lot of legislation, a lot of that will end up in justice, we’ve had two justice commit- tees in the past, we might want to continue doing that and that would allow each to have room to do its own scrutiny, its own inquir- ies and whatever else. It might be that we take a different route. If we want to free up individuals, MSPs generally, we might take a certain view of the numbers on commit- tees. Now you’ve got a trade-off there because you’ve got proportionality, it’s very difficult to be proportional and get the numbers down, but smaller committees, as a whole, tend to


23 May 2016 www.holyrood.com 13


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48