成人快手

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

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

Filter your results 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 26 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2087 contributions

|

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Freedom of Information Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 November 2025

Martin Whitfield

Are you saying that the strength of that review is the idea that the purposeful destruction of records in any situation should, at the very least, merit questions as to why it occurred?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Freedom of Information Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 November 2025

Martin Whitfield

Ben Worthy, shall we start with you?

I am allowing others some thinking time.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Freedom of Information Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 November 2025

Martin Whitfield

That is fine.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Document subject to Parliamentary Control

Meeting date: 30 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

Our second item of business is consideration of a document that is subject to the negative procedure and that has been referred to this committee for scrutiny on policy grounds.

Questions about the actual rules on imprint would need to be decided on by the Electoral Commission, and the role of this committee is in relation to either accepting or not accepting the guidance.

For clarity on procedure, any MSP may propose, by motion, that the lead committee recommend that the document not be approved. We are the lead committee for this document. If such a motion is lodged, it must be debated at a meeting of the committee, and the committee must then report to the Parliament. If there is no motion recommending that the document not be approved, the committee is not required to report to Parliament on the document.

I invite comments from members on the guidance that is before us.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Document subject to Parliamentary Control

Meeting date: 30 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

Thank you for that. A member has indicated that she will propose a motion, which we will need to debate. That debate cannot happen today, because the motion has not been lodged, but it will take place at the next public meeting of the committee.

Since no other member wishes to make a comment at this stage, I will adjourn the matter until the next public meeting of this committee, when we will see whether a member has lodged a motion.

That concludes our business in public.

09:35 Meeting continued in private until 09:45.  

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]

Decision on Taking Business in Private

Meeting date: 30 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

Good morning, and apologies for the slight delay to the start of the 19th meeting in 2025 of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee. I have received apologies from Sue Webber, and I welcome Edward Mountain, who is attending as her substitute.

Under agenda item 1, does the committee agree to take in private item 3, which is consideration of a note from the clerks on cross-party groups?

Members indicated agreement.

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

For clarification, minister, with regard to the proposals before the committee in these three SSIs, two have a remuneration deduction that relates to the MSP salary. Can you confirm that discussions have taken place with the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body about the consequences of the SSIs? Ailsa McKeever, I think that you suggested that that is the case, but I would like it on the record, because if we have an unresolved problem in one area that you are asking others to act on, that might raise a concern about the SSIs that are being presented to the committee as a formula for arriving at what was carried through unanimously in the legislation. Therefore, is it the case that there have been discussions with the SPCB and that the practical provisions in relation to how any deductions take place would fall to it?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

I have a couple of questions relating to our fellow committee, the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, and its responses鈥攁nd, indeed, the committee notice that was given in the chamber about, at a higher, generic level, the quality of some of the drafting that is coming out of the Scottish Government at the moment.

Ironically, the matters before us today go back to pay鈥攊t is funny how money is so important鈥攁nd the tension that exists between the Scotland Act 1998 and the chosen wording in the SSIs. Minister, before I delve into what level of confidence you have that the SSIs comply with the 1998 act, can you explain why we ended up in a position whereby different terminology was used, which certainly caused tension for the DPLR Committee?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

I am not asking for the publication of legal evidence鈥攚hich politicians seem to ask for at the drop of a hat鈥攂ut is your position supported by legal advice?

Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 October 2025

Martin Whitfield

I would say鈥攖ongue in cheek鈥攖hat it is because there has been a lack of clarification that the question arose in the first place. You have put it on record that the Government is confident that the provision will stand the test, perhaps even a judicial test, and that you have advice that supports that view.

Does any other committee member have any other questions before I turn to a colleague who is joining us today?

Just for the record, I note that the 14-day period in respect of being a member of the House of Lords is a period of time that has been chosen, in essence, so that someone in such a position can resign. Is the Scottish Government confident that there are no circumstances that may exist where it would be impossible for an individual to resign within 14 days, for example if the House of Lords is not sitting between a general election and the King鈥檚 speech?