The Scottish Executive requires, in the words of the recent RS/RSE report on Devolution and Science, "advice to support evidence-based policies". Following the pattern of the Scottish Office pre-devolution such advice is provided by small numbers of internal staff and the use of committees of experts where specialised advice is deemed necessary. The mechanism by which advice is secured seems unlikely to change. In principle there is no reason why it should if the required consultations and background are being delivered.

A note of caution however must be sounded since current provision is divided among departments. For example the Health, the Rural Affairs (who hold the agriculture, fisheries and food portfolio) and the Enterprise and Life-long learning departments all have science policy obligations and staff. When I visited in late September they appeared not to be as co-ordinated as they wished or should be. This concern is echoed in the RSE/RS report where it is pointed out that "over-compartmentalisation between government departments and between scientific disciplines, and lack of co-ordination across the wider SET base tend to frustrate an effective, integrated use of the science base in policy formulation." This problem must be tackled by the recent formed Science Strategy Review Group that will reflect on Scotlandís needs and current mechanisms before reporting in January 2000. Any changes required to the system are likely to be announced shortly thereafter.

Individual MSPs have access to specialist research and information through the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe). This plays an analogous role to the Westminster Parliamentís House of Commons Library. 8 SPICe girls and boys serve the needs of 131 MSPs. This ratio (1:16.4) is roughly equivalent to at Westminster where 47 researchers serve 659 MPs (1:14.0). The obvious disadvantage is that the SPICe researchers will each have to cover broader areas of expertise. For example the health researcherís brief will range from health economics to molecular medicine.

Use of a body such as the Westminster Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST), which can provide independent scientific advice on matters of political interest, might remedy the disadvantage of SPICe being small. Given the size of the Scottish Parliament, and the budget constraints it already operates under, use of a UK resource makes sense. However funding arrangements for POST or an analogue to provide advice to Holyrood will require to be developed. Alternatively, learned societies such as the Royal Societies of London or Edinburgh, or university research consortia might be able to provide impartial advice. However the need is filled, it is of paramount importance that the advice offered is independent of government and of business interests and the body is seen as having "a primary loyalty to the parliament" and not seen "merely as a lobby for science" (RS/RSE report).

As at Westminster, special committees scrutinise legislation and have the power to call expert witnesses. Committees will have specific need of independent advice, both from their invited experts and also perhaps through reports commissioned from POST or an analogue.