The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-21053, in the name of Martin Whitfield, on the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s third report of 2026.
18:55
Unlike the previous two motions, our motions do not include our entire reports. If they had, they would perhaps have made the Business Bulletin the longest in the entire session.
This evening, I will speak to three motions that mark the conclusion of two important pieces of work that the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee did in this session—our inquiry into committee effectiveness and our consideration of the recommendations in the gender-sensitive audit that the Presiding Officer established. If the changes that I will speak to are agreed, they will take effect from the start of session 7.
Our third report of 2026 sets out a number of standing order rule changes that the committee recommends following its report on strengthening committee effectiveness. Parliament endorsed those changes in the committee’s debate on its inquiry, which was held on 6 November 2025. Members may wish to note that the proposal relating to elected conveners will be considered under a separate motion later this evening.
The key rule changes that are proposed in the report include reducing from 15 to 10 the maximum number of members who may sit on committees, implementing the recommendation in the gender-sensitive audit that no single-sex committees be permitted in the next session, ensuring that committee membership normally reflects the gender balance of the Parliament, and enabling committees to meet in private at the same time as the chamber without requiring prior permission to do so.
As Martin Whitfield knows, we support the majority of the proposed changes, but I raise a specific concern about proposed new rule 6.3.4A, which states that the Parliamentary Bureau must ensure that a committee’s members are not all of the same sex. Does he accept that that rule will inevitably result in some women being pressured to join more committees than men and working harder for the same MSP salary? Does he think that that will be in line with equal pay laws?
I am grateful for the intervention from Sue Webber, who was a member of the committee when we discussed the matter. She and other members will be aware from the report that great concern was raised that pressure will be put on women, particularly but not exclusively in smaller parties, by an expectation that they will serve on committees that will be driven merely by the fact that they are women. There is concern that they may be persuaded to sit on more than one or two committees in order to fulfil the rule. However, we discussed the matter at a number of meetings and I have confidence that the wording that we propose will reflect the reality and prevent that situation from occurring. If it did occur, it would be beholden on not just the committee or those who sit in the Presiding Officer’s chair but the Parliament as a whole to look at it immediately.
In the evidence that we took for our report, we picked up that there are sometimes difficulties in the expectations that are placed on members. However, it is interesting to note that, in standing orders, the bureau is asked to take into account individual members’ interests in serving on committees. That has perhaps been celebrated in its absence more than it has been taken forward, and it is perhaps something that Parliament can look at in the new session.
We also propose that the deadline for the introduction of members’ bills be brought forward. That has been discussed at great length over the past month in various debates in the chamber. The change would prevent what we have seen at the end of the current session, when a significant number of members’ bills have had to be pushed and forced through. Bringing the deadline forward will prevent such backlogs from occurring at the end of future sessions.
Other proposals include strengthening committees’ annual reporting requirements and introducing a requirement for a dedicated debate slot for the people’s panels that are being committed to in the next session.
Finally, the report recommends changes to the standing orders to introduce a hosting role to allow for the sharing of knowledge and expertise between committees. That will enable a committee to invite members of another committee to attend and participate in the committee’s meetings and to have enhanced rights to access the private sessions and meeting papers but not the right to vote at that committee.
The committee believes that making those changes will strengthen the Parliament’s committees and give them additional tools for more effective scrutiny. I invite members to support the motion at decision time.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s 3rd Report, 2026 (Session 6), Standing Order rule changes arising from the Committee’s report ‘Strengthening committees’ effectiveness’ (SP Paper 977), and agrees that the changes to Standing Orders set out in Annex A of the report be made with effect from 11 May 2026.
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.