Official Report 158KB pdf
Our first task is to consider a request from the cross-party group on Palestine to waive rule 8.3.2 of the "Code of Conduct for Members of the Scottish Parliament". That rule requires cross-party groups to have at least one MSP from each party that is represented in the Parliamentary Bureau. The cross-party group on Palestine lacks a Conservative member. Some committee members will recall that we waived the rule for the cross-party group on nuclear disarmament.
As the person who withdrew from the group is a member of my party, may I ask whether it would be appropriate to inquire why he withdrew? I have not been informed of that. It is a general principle that cross-party groups should be allowed to meet. Such a situation should not prevent them from meeting. However, I suspect that it would be useful to have that information. There might be no particular reason, but it would be useful to know.
What Lord James said was helpful. I am keen for us to examine as part of our review of cross-party groups how genuinely cross-party the groups are. Groups with a genuine interest should not be prevented from meeting. As we have waived the rule in the past, we should do so for the cross-party group on Palestine, particularly as it will probably meet only once or twice before dissolution. However, we should clarify the rule as part of our review, to be fair to all sides and to avoid a situation in which one party can prevent everyone else in the Parliament from getting together.
I guess that I should declare an interest as a member of the cross-party group on Palestine. I broadly concur with the comments that have been made. It is helpful that Pauline McNeill, who is the group's convener, has proactively sought to notify us of the situation. I suspect that one or two other groups are in a similar position but have not brought that fact to our attention. In the circumstances—not least the fact that the issue is topical and dissolution is only a couple of months away—I believe that it is important that we should allow the group to continue to meet. As Ken Macintosh said, we or the next Standards Committee will have to explore the issues further as part of the review of the cross-party groups.
The problem that has been highlighted is that some issues will not attract members of all parties. That will have to be looked into. However, there is no reason why the cross-party group on Palestine should not continue to meet, as the precedent has been set.
Are members content to waive the rule?
As the person who withdrew from the cross-party group did not formally notify any committee members, I do not object to the rule's being waived.
We agree to waive the rule. The cross-party group on Palestine may continue to meet as normal until dissolution.