Standards Committee, 19 Dec 2001

Meeting date: Wednesday, December 19, 2001

Official Report 70KB pdf

---

Complaint

I thank the members of the public and press, the official report and broadcasting staff for their patience.

Item 3 relates to a complaint against Lloyd Quinan. Specifically, the committee must decide whether there has been a breach of the code of conduct.

The complaint relates to a newspaper article published in the Sunday Mail in February reporting comments allegedly made by Lloyd Quinan concerning a complaint against Dr Richard Simpson. Subsequently, Dr Simpson submitted a complaint to the standards adviser alleging that the comments attributed to Lloyd Quinan in the newspaper were intemperate and breached section 10.2.1 of the code of conduct which states:

"MSPs should not communicate any complaint to the press or other media until a decision has been made as to how the complaint is to be dealt with."

We have now had an opportunity to consider the adviser's report and must now determine whether there has been a breach of the code. I shall go round the table and take members' views.

We have given this matter a great deal of consideration. Although the adviser's report makes the series of events very clear, there is a deal of uncertainty about how we interpret the code of conduct in relation to the member's behaviour in this particular case. As a result, I do not find that there has been a breach of the code in this matter.

I have examined this issue carefully. I appreciate the adviser's report, which sets out the facts clearly for us. The facts are not in dispute. Section 10.2.1 of the code of conduct, and the last sentence in particular, are open to interpretation on the timing of complaints and the issue of communication. There are a number of wider issues that we need to consider in light of the complaint. However, given the ambiguity of that section of the code of conduct, we should not find against Lloyd Quinan.

Nobody disputes the facts, as outlined in the report by William Spence. The sequence of events is not in dispute; the issue is the interpretation of section 10.2.1 of the code of conduct as to when a complaint is live. It is my view that a complaint is live once it is lodged. Section 10.2.1 of the code of conduct should be clarified. I endorse the account of the facts, but they do not amount to a breach of the code.

I, too, am concerned about the ambiguity of section 10.2.1. It is obvious that the committee must examine that section and clear up the matter for future reference. Like other members, I do not find that there has been a breach of the code of conduct in this case.

I do not find that there has been a breach of the code of conduct in this instance. I thank the adviser for his report, which is full and has helped us considerably in our investigation. It is clear that the code of conduct, and section 10.2.1 in particular, are ambiguous. It is a priority for the committee to examine the code of conduct in the light of our experiences and to make revisions where necessary.

I will sum up. The unanimous view of the committee is that there has been no breach of the code of conduct by Lloyd Quinan, and that there is no dispute as to the events, as set out in the adviser's report. The difficulty is that section 10.2.1 of the code of conduct is far too ambiguous. As a priority, we must examine that paragraph and make it absolutely clear.

If members of the committee agree, I will ask the clerk to circulate a draft report for comments, in the hope that we can agree the terms by correspondence and arrange for the report to be published before the Christmas recess. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.