³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Thank you for inviting me to give evidence on these three sets of regulations. The regulations that the committee is scrutinising are the culmination of an intense period of consultation and policy development since the passing of the Scottish Elections (Representation Reform) Act 2025. Part 2 of the act, which was passed unanimously by the Scottish Parliament in December 2024, requires that the Scottish ministers lay draft regulations before the Parliament prohibiting ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ from holding dual mandates as ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ and peers. It includes a discretionary power in relation to ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ who are also councillors.

The public consultation exercise ran in early 2025, to ensure that members of the public, interested stakeholders and political parties had an opportunity to share their views on the issue of dual mandates in the Scottish Parliament. The consultation sought views on the practical steps required to create a workable policy for the institution.

There are three sets of regulations before us, one for each category of dual mandate. The first set of regulations will disqualify ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ who also hold an MP role if they do not resolve their dual mandate within 49 days of being returned as an MSP or an MP, whichever comes second. That period is intended to limit vacancies that arise before the end of June, thereby seeking to ensure that by-elections do not fall during the typical Scottish school summer holiday period of July and August.

The second set of regulations will disqualify ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ who also hold a role as a member of the House of Lords if they do not resolve their dual mandate within 14 days of being returned as an MSP or of taking the oath as a member of the House of Lords, whichever comes second. This period is shorter than the other periods proposed, in order to reflect the unelected nature of the Lords and therefore the lack of constituents and the lack of by-elections that would be expected in the other categories.

The final set of regulations will disqualify ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ who also hold a role as a councillor in a Scottish local authority if they do not resolve their dual mandate before the end of one of the periods of exception. The first exception applies if there are fewer than 372 days between the day on which the person is returned as an MSP and the day that the next ordinary election of councillors is due to be held. The exception allows councillors who become ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ at an election that falls in the year before the local elections to complete their term as councillors. That is intended to prevent a large number of vacancies and by-elections within a year of a local government election.

The second exemption applies when there are more than 372 days between a councillor being returned as an MSP and the date of the next ordinary election of councillors. In these circumstances, they must resolve their dual mandate within 49 days of being elected to their second role. As is the case with the first set of regulations, this seven-week period is intended to limit by-elections over the summer period.

Although all the regulations will come into force on the day after they are signed, they do not disqualify any MSP until the day of the poll at the next Scottish Parliament election, which ensures that no current ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ face disqualification, providing around six months’ notice of the change in position and preventing any disruption to the last year of the current parliamentary session.

It caused tension, but the DPLR Committee recognised that the provision would do what it said, so there was no issue about that—I think that the only issue that the DPLR Committee raised was the discrepancy in the use of language. The committee was content that the provision would achieve the stated purpose.

Oddly enough, that was the question that I asked as soon as I looked at this, convener, because I recognise the commentary from the DPLR Committee. We believe that the language that has been used provides the maximum clarity on what we are setting out to achieve. I will bring in Jordan McGrory to talk you through that, if that would be useful.

Yes.

I simply acknowledge the point that you have made, Mr Mountain. As I said a moment ago, if the committee and the Parliament see fit to pass the regulations, it will fall to the next Parliament to monitor their effectiveness.

Motion agreed to,

That the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee recommends that the Scottish Parliament (Disqualification of Councillors) Regulations 2025 be approved.

Again, I was not in post when the matter was initially progressed, so Ailsa McKeever could perhaps explain the rationale.

That was part of our thinking.

Again, I will bring Ailsa McKeever in, because she has been through this whole process.

We will undertake the responsibility.

We will go back to Ailsa McKeever on the rationale for the 372 days.

We are trying to protect colleagues in that situation, too, because there is often a great deal of media interest in what is happening in that regard—