���˿���

We do not have that approach because of our electoral system, which does not allow for regional by-elections. If we introduced regional by-elections for recall, why would we not have by-elections for a member who just stands down? That would be delving into the whole electoral system in Scotland. The concept of a regional by-election would be completely new.

I have tried to come up with something straightforward, and it really is. You might not agree with it, but it is quite easy to understand. It is fair that, as far as it goes, we cannot completely replicate the constituency element of recall in the regional system. It cannot be done, but I have got quite close.

Yes, I accept that. Glasgow is possibly the easiest area to do that in the country, whereas people would have further to travel to get to signing places in the Highlands, where they would clearly be more spread out. I imagine that that is already the case in elections. I am afraid that I do not know how far people have to travel, but I imagine that it is a lot further in the Highlands than it is for you or me in the areas that we represent. It is important that we get that right. A lot of that will be left to regulations and councils, so we need to work closely with them to get the right places.

Ben McKendrick wants to come in at this point.

It is an area that should be looked at further, but it should be left to regulations.

It was not easy. I consulted, but I did not really have any answers—until I had a light-bulb moment. That sometimes happens to me—I come up with things.

I think that I have arrived at a solution—I am not saying that it is the only solution, but it is a solution. What I have proposed is a fair and proportionate solution. However, I accept that there will be different views on that; you might have a different view. I thought that the evidence that the minister gave on that last week was very good. He seemed to get what I am trying to achieve.

I am trying to be fair to everyone. It is really important that we treat regional and constituency members the same, as far as possible. We are talking about taking away somebody’s job, at the end of the day, and that is a big thing. That is why I have arrived at the system that I have arrived at. It is not possible to completely replicate the system for both types of member, but, as far as possible, I have tried to do that.

I do not think that it would be strong enough. The code of conduct can be easily changed, so anything that you did now could be changed later.

My starting point was the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, which applies to councillors and which I mentioned earlier. It seemed to me that, if we have a law that requires a certain level of attendance by councillors, we really ought to have the same for ���˿���. However, as you know, there is currently nothing in that regard.

My approach to stage 2 is that I am open to any suggestions on any part of the bill if they would improve the bill and if it can be demonstrated that they would work. I go back to the phrase “fair and proportionate”, which I have used several times—any proposed system should be fair and proportionate. The process needs to be fair to every member of the Parliament. I do not think that it would be fair to remove somebody without their having had the opportunity to state their case; the fact that they had simply met a trigger would not be good enough. If we were to have that in a regional context, we ought to have it in a constituency context, too.

—but that is not a reason to remove somebody from their elected position.

The tests are set out in the bill. They would need to actually break certain rules, which are set out in the bill. It is not enough to say, “I don’t like that person. I don’t like the way they have gone about that campaign,” or whatever. No chance.

In cases such as that, people are entitled to a degree of privacy. I know that we will come on to talk about non-attendance, but you have raised it. Let us that say somebody has an illness—this has happened. ���˿��� fall ill, which means that they cannot come in for a period of time. We would not expect somebody to lose their job because of that, and, if the MSP wanted it to be private, we would expect it to be private. Things happen in people’s lives that mean that they cannot come into work and they deserve that level of privacy. I am trying to maintain that.

Okay. Well, let us pick somebody who has switched parties: Jamie Greene. If Jamie Greene were subject to a recall vote and he lost, he would be replaced by the next person on the Conservative list in the region that he was elected to.

The parliamentary authorities would have to come up with a system for monitoring attendance. I am not going to lay that out in detail—I do not think that that would be right. This committee would certainly have a role if somebody was falling foul of the requirement to attend, and we have to trust the members of this committee to keep issues private, as they do—I think that this committee works very well.

In previous meetings, the issue arose of whether, in such cases, this committee should have lay members, so that decisions could be de-politicised. The bill does not address that, but it is perhaps something that should be considered.