We move straight to agenda item 2, which concerns the complaint against Dr Richard Simpson. Our first substantive item of business is consideration of the standards adviser's report on two complaints against Dr Simpson, both of which allege that he failed to declare a registrable interest when participating in related parliamentary proceedings. The interest in question relates to Dr Simpson's membership of the prostate forum, which was supported by an educational grant from Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd. The complainers alleged that the company manufactures and licenses the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and that Dr Simpson failed to declare the interest when participating in parliamentary proceedings on the vaccine.
The standards adviser's report, which I have read carefully, makes it clear that Dr Simpson has not breached the order. In view of the report and the evidence in front of us, I agree that Dr Simpson has not breached the code of conduct.
I, too, have read the report, which makes it very clear that Dr Simpson has not breached the code of conduct.
I, too, find that Dr Simpson has not breached the code of conduct. The report, which I understand will be published, essentially clears him. There may be circumstances in which members could avoid any possibility of complaint or confusion by making a negative declaration. However, that should be at the discretion of the MSP concerned; there should be no obligation on him or her to make such a declaration.
I agree with other members that there has obviously been no breach. Although I have a lot of sympathy with Lord James's point about the negative declaration, I believe that asking members to declare that they do not have an interest might get us into tricky situations. The issue may be one on which members do not know that they should declare that they do not have an interest. We are starting to make life a little bit complicated for members. However, it is worth making it clear that, if members have any doubts about their position, they should check things out before they reach the point of having to declare that they have or do not have an interest. The advice of the clerks is always available to them for that purpose.
Our code of conduct makes it quite clear that members who lodge a complaint against another member must not approach the media or publicise the complaint before the committee has dealt with it. However, I agree that the point is worth re-emphasising at this stage.
I agree with what members are saying. On Patricia Ferguson's point about a reminder to all members, I cannot recollect any direct reminder other than what members would have received from the Standards Committee's outline. The report is well-written and thorough and I approve the recommendations.
I have just been reminded by the clerk that a reminder was sent to all members in February.
That was following the receipt of this complaint.
I agree with the standards adviser's recommendations. It is important to recognise that, in this case, Richard Simpson broke neither the letter nor the spirit of the code. As an MSP, Dr Simpson has other registrable interests; to my knowledge, he is most conscientious about drawing his colleagues' attention to those interests when he thinks it appropriate as well as about declaring them in the "Register of Members' Interests". Although I have some sympathy with Lord James's point about negative declarations, I think that Dr Simpson was very surprised at the allegations made against him, as he is conscientious about ensuring that he is not put in a position where he might be seen to be prejudiced. He is transparent in that respect.
As that might be the subject of a complaint against another member, I am not sure whether this meeting would be the appropriate forum in which to comment on the matter at this stage.
In case we breach our own code.
If there are no other comments, I will sum up. In light of the adviser's investigation, the committee has found that Richard Simpson has not breached either the members' interests order or the code of conduct. We will publish a report setting out our conclusions as soon as is practicable. Are members content?
Our final item of business is the committee's consideration of two draft committee reports concerning complaints against members. As agreed at the beginning of the meeting, we will take this item in private. I ask members of the public, press, official report and broadcasting to leave the meeting.
Meeting continued in private until 10:18.
Previous
Item in Private