John Wilson MSP

Welcome to John Wilson MSP's biography pages

Parliamentary Activities

Search for other Speeches made by John Wilson

Meeting of the Parliament 05 March 2015 Business until 16:03 : Thursday, March 05, 2015
John Wilson

Can the member clarify how the monitoring of the proposed register of lobbying is intended to be administered, thus ensuring that there is a maximum level of transparency of the register for the public, so that they can have confidence in any register that is established within this Parliament?



Meeting of the Parliament 05 March 2015 Business until 16:03 : Thursday, March 05, 2015
3. John Wilson (Central Scotland) (Ind)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how it will engage on the proposal to establish a register of lobbying. (S4O-04093)



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 04 March 2015 : Wednesday, March 04, 2015
John Wilson

I am not disagreeing with you, but that does not make the 2003 act right.



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 04 March 2015 : Wednesday, March 04, 2015
John Wilson

I understand where the Accounts Commission might be coming from with regard to the setting up of corporate bodies, but I am concerned that the community planning partnership itself might not be the corporate body, and that two or more partners might decide to become a corporate body to deliver services that other community planning partners already deliver. Where would the division be between a corporate body that might contain two or more partners and the community planning partnership? Does the minister envisage a potential conflict between the status of the corporate body and the status of the community planning partnership?



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 04 March 2015 : Wednesday, March 04, 2015
John Wilson

I seek clarification from the minister.

Minister, you indicated that there has been no approach by a community planning partnership to establish a corporate body. Why do you feel that it is appropriate to put the provision in legislation at this time? If there were an approach by a CPP, or by two partners within a CPP, to set up a corporate body, further legislation would need to be laid before Parliament to allow that to happen. Would it not be more appropriate to leave out the provisions in section 12 until we are confident that corporate body status is the best way to take forward community planning partnerships?



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 04 March 2015 : Wednesday, March 04, 2015
John Wilson

Minister, you said that there are 35,000 organisations on the national register. I seek clarification. I stand to be corrected if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the SCVO claims to have a membership of 55,000. If that is the case and there are 35,000 organisations on the register, where are the other 20,000? I know that the register omits certain very active community organisations. How can we gather information on all the other community organisations that are working away day and daily to deliver services in their local communities but are not on the national register?



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 04 March 2015 : Wednesday, March 04, 2015
John Wilson

I am sorry, convener—I was trying to intervene on Mr Rowley. Maybe the minister can help out with this.

I know what amendment 1055 says. I heard what Mr Rowley said about the fact that community organisations, if they so wished, could refuse to be on the register that is held by local authorities. I am slightly confused, because I would like local authorities to be aware of the existence of those community organisations—the bingo group, the sewing bee—so that they can consult them. I am concerned about community organisations being able to deregister from the council’s list. I am trying to get to a point where we—the Parliament, the Government, local authorities and communities—fully understand what organisations exist in an area and what services they deliver within that area, which may not be statutory services. What I am frightened of is the duplication that may take place when a health board or a local authority decides that it is going to provide social care services for the elderly that are already being delivered at a local level by a local community group. That is where I would agree with amendment 1055, but I am rather concerned now with Mr Rowley’s insistence that groups could deregister and not be on the list. I have a fear that we end up failing to understand what is happening at the local level and what is being delivered by communities at a local level, if groups are not on any list.



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 04 March 2015 : Wednesday, March 04, 2015
John Wilson (Central Scotland) (Ind)

On amendment 1055, which states that local authorities must maintain a list of groups in their areas, the minister made great play of the national register that is kept by third sector organisations. However, such organisations continually complain about not having enough funding, and the register can be maintained only if the third sector organisations in a local area have the resources to carry out the work to maintain it.

I take on board Stewart Stevenson’s comments regarding some of the groups that are not covered by the third sector register; he referred to the example of a sewing bee. Although such groups are not on the national register, they may, at a local level, provide a valuable service for elderly people and others who take advantage of the social interaction and activity that is generated by participating in the group.

In my village, there is a group of pensioners—only about a dozen—who come together once a week to play bingo. Their group may not be registered but, in my view, it plays a vital part in delivering elderly care services. The communication and interaction that take place in the group may be meaningful for them, but it would not be flagged up in a national register. Amendment 1055 calls on local authorities to maintain a register that would include that type of group, rather than a register that lists third sector or voluntary organisations that may get national or local funding and can be easily identified by third sector interfaces to ensure that they are on it.

With regard to the other issues around community council schemes, Stewart Stevenson is right once again, and I seek guidance from the minister. I understand that every local authority has a community council scheme in operation. Local authorities know and set the boundaries for those community councils. Unfortunately, some community council boundaries do not mirror the natural boundaries of communities; in that regard, Mr Rowley and Mr Stevenson gave examples of how communities view their local areas. Credence is given to community council boundaries because they are already set out by local authorities, but we may have to look at that to find out whether community councils naturally cover areas that are much larger than areas of multiple deprivation, to ensure that we are targeting resources through community planning partnerships at those areas.

11:00  

I think that this is a work in progress and I welcome the minister’s statement that, for stage 3, he could work with Alex Rowley to ensure that we get something in legislation that encompasses what we are trying to achieve here. The bottom line for everybody around this table and in the Parliament is that we achieve the goal of ensuring that the policies, the practice and the delivery of community planning partnerships are best suited to the communities that need most help. Community planning partnerships have been around for over 30 years but, unfortunately, in many cases they are still struggling to get the necessary resources for the communities that are most in need. I hope that we can get a piece of legislation in place that can achieve the best outcomes for those communities and for the nation as a whole.



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 25 February 2015 : Wednesday, February 25, 2015
John Wilson

Another issue, which the convener has raised, is about a local authority wanting to reduce the number of premises that provide sexual entertainment in an area. You said that guidance will be issued to local authorities. Some authorities might decide to go for a zero-tolerance policy, which would involve a blanket ban on sexual entertainment venues in their areas. What would happen if, say, the City of Edinburgh Council or Glasgow City Council adopted a zero-tolerance approach? How would that fit in with what some in the industry argue are grandfather rights in relation to the continuing provision of such premises?



Local Government and Regeneration Committee 25 February 2015 : Wednesday, February 25, 2015
John Wilson

The committee heard evidence from theatre group representatives who were concerned that their artistic expression might be impacted on by vexatious complaints or by individuals who used the bill to shut down theatrical productions. Can you give any assurances to theatre companies whose productions might contain nudity, for example, that they could be exempted from the relevant provisions of the bill?

Vote DetailMSP VoteResult

S4M-12521.2 Jackie Baillie: Protecting Public Services and Boosting Scotland’s Economy—As an amendme
>> Show more
NoDefeated

S4M-12521.1 Gavin Brown: Protecting Public Services and Boosting Scotland’s Economy—As an amendment
>> Show more
NoDefeated

S4M-12521.3 Willie Rennie: Protecting Public Services and Boosting Scotland’s Economy—As an amendmen
>> Show more
NoDefeated

S4M-12521 John Swinney: Protecting Public Services and Boosting Scotland’s Economy—That the Parliame
>> Show more
AbstainCarried

S4M-12495 Joe FitzPatrick on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau: Business Motion—That the Parliament
>> Show more
Not VotedCarried

S4M-12491.2 John Swinney: Privacy and the State—As an amendment to motion S4M-12491 in the name of W
>> Show more
NoCarried

S4M-12491.1 Richard Simpson: Privacy and the State—As an amendment to motion S4M-12491 in the name o
>> Show more
YesDefeated

S4M-12491 Willie Rennie: Privacy and the State—That the Parliament notes the Scottish Government’s c
>> Show more
NoCarried

S4M-12492.2 Jamie Hepburn: Mental Health—As an amendment to motion S4M-12492 in the name of Jim Hume
>> Show more
YesCarried

S4M-12492 Jim Hume: Mental Health—That the Parliament notes that one in four people will experience
>> Show more
YesCarried

Search for other Motions lodged by John Wilson
EventIdTypeSub TypeMSP NameParty NameConstituencyRegionTitleItemTextFormattedAnswer DateAnswerStatusIdExpectedAnswerDateAnsweredByMspApprovedDateSubmissionDateMeetingDateProductionStatusIdRecordStatusIdStatus DateOnBehalfOfConsideredForMembersBusinessCrossPartySupportRegisteredInterestSupportCountSupportDateIsEventLinkCurrentMinister
Motion S4M-12450: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 26/02/2015 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-12434: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 25/02/2015 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-12419: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 24/02/2015 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11816: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 04/12/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11521: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 12/11/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11520: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 12/11/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11247: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 20/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11246: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 20/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11245: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 20/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11213: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 15/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Search for other Questions asked by John Wilson
EventIdTypeSub TypeMSP NameParty NameConstituencyRegionTitleItemTextFormattedAnswer DateAnswerStatusIdExpectedAnswerDateAnsweredByMspApprovedDateSubmissionDateMeetingDateProductionStatusIdRecordStatusIdStatus DateOnBehalfOfConsideredForMembersBusinessCrossPartySupportRegisteredInterestSupportCountSupportDateIsEventLinkCurrentMinister
Question S4W-24732: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 04/03/2015 Show Full Question >>
Question S4O-04093: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 24/02/2015 Show Full Question >>
Question S4O-04046: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 18/02/2015 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-24352: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 05/02/2015 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23340: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 21/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23345: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 21/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23344: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 21/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23341: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 21/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23343: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 21/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23342: John Wilson, Central Scotland, Independent, Date Lodged: 21/11/2014 Show Full Question >>

Further information

Email our Public Information Service for more information.