Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 17 June 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1653 contributions

|

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Committee Effectiveness Inquiry

Meeting date: 15 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Can I draw just us back to—

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Committee Effectiveness Inquiry

Meeting date: 15 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

So, members would get an insight into not just why an individual was interested in that committee, but also—you have described this eloquently—the process and the approach, and the empathy, that they would bring as convener. In that way, members would understand, even before the committee started, the sort of committee that it would be, and you think that that would be to the benefit of both the chamber and the wider audience.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

That is excellent. Jenny, do you have any comments in response to that question?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

That is fine—it is why I asked the question.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

On the understanding that I neither agree nor disagree with the proposal, there is a tension between the information that this committee may want to have in order to reach a decision and how the data needs to be obtained and handled and how long it is preserved for. A challenge exists in the fact that, in the real world, additional information will, no doubt, be available through social media and the opinions and views of people who allegedly have other information that is not being put forward. This committee—along with a number of others—spends a huge amount of time balancing those two aspects.

Then there is the challenge of the existence of things that become disclosable subsequently. Notwithstanding whether I agree or disagree with the proposal, a decision that this committee reaches on such a point would at some stage invariably have to go to the chamber for validation, because we are subservient to the chamber in that regard. The amount of information that then becomes available in respect of that challenges all strong efforts to retain data on the smallest number of people and for the shortest period of time.

I am asking you the impossible question, and you know that it is coming. How do we reconcile the tensions? In reality, information will get out there that could be particularly harmful to an individual MSP but that has been handled as well as it possibly can be under GDPR. Is there a danger that, in achieving that, we defeat the purpose of what we are trying to do? On paper, that is relatively straightforward: it is whether there is an explanation for why someone has not been in attendance.

Discuss. [Laughter.]

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

I am sorry, but I am going to rudely cut across you. What the bill is asking us to decide is whether there is a reason for someone not having been present for 180 days. In a sense, it is not about putting the record straight. If other information comes out, the bill does not say that we need to put the record straight. We can sit within that remit of just saying, “This is our view.”

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Peter Stanyon, are there alternatives that we should have on the horizon rather than the recall that is proposed?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

I will come back on a couple of points. The petition itself is simply about going in and saying, “As an individual, I’m putting my name here for the recall.” In the—thankfully relatively limited—examples of recall petitions in the United Kingdom, have there been any challenges with regard to delivery? Have people wanted to indicate, “No—I don’t a recall to take place”?

At the moment, you walk through the door of wherever the petition is being signed and everyone knows which way you are voting. Have you had any administrative challenges in that regard or experiences as to how that plays out in real time? I ask Peter Stanyon to respond first.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Therefore, it is not insurmountable in the sense of it being such a big challenge that we should not go there.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Scottish Parliament (Recall and Removal of Members) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 8 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

That is very helpful.