The next item on the agenda is the election of the convener. For members' clarification, I should read out the relevant rules in the standing orders, which say:
Members are aware that an outstanding complaint against me will be the subject of a report by the independent standards adviser to the committee. As a result, if I am elected as convener, I intend to preside only over the election of the deputy convener. I will then step aside to allow the deputy convener to take full charge of the Standards Committee until the report from the independent standards adviser has been submitted to and considered by the committee. If the independent standards adviser finds against me, I will of course resign as convener.
Thank you. Does any member wish to comment?
I have one question. After making inquiries last week, I determined that it was incumbent on the committee to elect a convener at its first meeting. However, I am slightly unclear as to whether it would be in order to elect an acting convener. Can we have a ruling on that point?
I do not think that such a decision would be in order, but I will seek advice from the clerk on it.
The standing orders contain no provision to elect an acting convener. Instead, they state that the committee must elect a convener at its first meeting.
Thank you. I merely want to ensure that we leave no stone unturned.
It is with regret that I must express my concern about the Scottish National Party nomination for convener at this time. Although I do not want to question any party's right to make a nomination, the integrity of the Parliament is paramount. We must be seen to be open and transparent at all times. Under the circumstances, it would have been better if the Scottish National Party had chosen to nominate a member who was not the subject of an investigation. However, it would not be right of me as a committee member to prejudge the investigation and I appreciate Ms Marwick's statement that she will stand down. That is only right; doing so is both in her best interests and in the best interests of the Parliament and the committee. That said, I should put on record my concern that we are being placed in a difficult position.
We are clearly faced with an unfortunate situation. However, I welcome Tricia Marwick's statement. As it would be difficult for any member to take any action that would prejudge the situation, the matter is very much in Tricia's hands. I am pleased that she has stated her commitment to step down while the complaint is being dealt with. In fairness to both sides—and, indeed, to any member in her situation—it is only right that the matter is considered impartially. This is the only way of ensuring that that happens.
All of us, including Tricia Marwick, have been placed in a rather invidious position that none of us would wish to be in. Perhaps we could ask the Procedures Committee to consider whether, because of the special nature of the Standards Committee, nominations for its convener and deputy convener should be taken out of the hands of the political parties and be made separate and discrete from such nominations for other committees. I know that that cannot happen today, but perhaps in the fullness of time we could pass the matter on to the Procedures Committee and see what it makes of my suggestion.
Having asked the initial question, I simply want to endorse other members' comments. We are in a difficult position but, given the SNP's determination to make its nomination, the committee is acting in the best possible way. I welcome Tricia Marwick's statement, because it makes things as clean as possible—if I can put it that way.
Now that members have had their say, we will move to the election of the convener.
As the other SNP member on the committee, I nominate on behalf of my party Tricia Marwick as the committee convener.
Tricia Marwick was chosen as convener.
I congratulate Tricia Marwick on her election.
Previous
InterestsNext
Deputy Convener