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 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 6 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2076 contributions

|

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Is there a challenge in the bill having an objective assessment on, say, attendance? Other examples might be put forward that are, in essence, conduct related—that is, aspects that are internal to the Parliament’s code of conduct. When you apply the subjective reality of the individuals who fulfil the role of MSP, it is hard to reconcile that with a stark objective rule such as one that states that they must be present in Parliament at least once in 180 days. If someone wanted to game the system—I do not think that any MSP or elected official would ever choose to do so—their turning up once would take them out of the spotlight. However, the subjective reality of an individual’s life might put them in the spotlight when that spotlight should not be on them.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

That offer is now on the record. Thank you.

I thank the witnesses for attending today and for their evidence. If you have any thoughts afterwards, please feel free to correspond with the committee. I hope you will not mind us doing the same if we have any questions. I particularly thank Annabel Mullin for attending remotely. I am glad that that worked as well as it did—it shows that hybrid working can work properly.

That brings the public part of the meeting to an end.

11:09 Meeting continued in private until 11:22.  

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

So, there is a potential tension. Therefore, the committee should look closely at the triggering effects, because, if we do not, that conflict could potentially cause a bigger problem.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Thank you. I am sure that we will explore some of those points in detail later. I pass over to Sue Webber.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

You have raised the issue of turnout at by-elections, which is somewhere between 32 and 45 per cent, depending on the circumstances. They are very small turnouts, compared to full elections, and yet the level of 10 per cent triggers a by-election. Is there merit in looking at the connection between the figures, or should we look separately at the policy decision on the level of 10 per cent and the reality of the enthusiasm or otherwise for by-elections?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Yes, it is a policy decision. That is helpful.

Another issue that I have picked up concerns the indicators that could prompt the recall process. Do we need to be careful in that regard, and to recognise the difference between what are potentially political decisions to seek to oust an MSP and a more moral agreed understanding? For example, removal following imprisonment for the period of a year already exists; there are measures to identify that.

What is the tension between the internal Scottish Parliament consequences that could lead to the process being activated and the external ones? What level of care do we need to put in place if we are going to pull our internal behaviour into an external result?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Should we consider that aspect as part of the bill or, if the bill becomes law, should it be considered internally by the Parliament with regard to its procedures?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Following on from that, I would say that another aspect of this is the money that is spent. With some of the petitions that make it to Westminster, parties have put enormous resource into ensuring that the 10 per cent threshold is reached. Do we need to take that issue into account? Obviously, that might not be dealt with in primary legislation, but there is a question about how much money is thrown at recalls. In some of the examples that you have shared from the US, those who backed petitions with a high level of resource achieved changes that might not otherwise have occurred. What level of credit, credence and thought should we give to that issue at this stage?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

So, make it a separation at that point.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

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

Meeting date: 22 May 2025

Martin Whitfield

Is that a comment about your bill or about this committee? In any case, I am more than happy to take the flavour of the witnesses’ views.