Plenary, 01 Nov 2001
Meeting date: Thursday, November 1, 2001
Official Report
576KB pdf
Presiding Officer's Ruling
I said this morning that I would reflect further on the point of order that was raised by Fiona Hyslop.
The Parliament's code of conduct and the register of members' interests are the responsibility of the Standards Committee. Any questions concerning the code or the register should therefore be addressed to that committee.
Questions about a minister's ability to undertake functions that are within his general responsibility would be in order.
The Scottish ministerial code is the responsibility of the First Minister. Questions to the Executive on matters relating to the code would therefore be in order. The Parliament might be aware that the Executive has in the past responded to written questions from members concerning ministers' compliance with the code.
As I said this morning, it is difficult to rule on hypothetical questions. I will therefore continue to consider each question and supplementary question on their merits—within the written guidance that I issued this morning.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Over lunch time, have you had a request from the First Minister to make a personal statement in terms of rule 13.1 of the standing orders, which would give him an opportunity to answer in the Parliament the many questions that have been raised during the past week regarding his office in Glenrothes? The matter is important because—as we know from your ruling last week during First Minister's question time and from your statement earlier today—there are severe limitations on what can be asked during question time in this Parliament.
If the First Minister were to make such a statement, would it be in order for him to answer the questions that he has so far studiously avoided in relation to the office in Glenrothes? For example, would it be in order for him to tell members during what period or periods he sublet his offices? Would it be in order for him to tell us how much was received in rent from his sub-tenants and how much was reclaimed? If the First Minister did not benefit personally from the offices that were wrongly claimed on, would it be in order for him to tell us who did benefit and why the First Minister is repaying the sum of £9,000 from his own pocket?
There are many more questions that one could ask. Would it be in order for the First Minister to tell us whether he authorised the Minister for Parliament, Mr McCabe, to go on television last night and claim that the First Minister had been exonerated by the standards commissioner at Westminster, when the First Minister himself acknowledged last week that there had been no investigation by her?
On the question of the use of Mr McLeish's parliamentary office for party political purposes during the 1999 Scottish elections, I note from the press that his election agent said:
"The publication of a leaflet with Mr McLeish's address on it was an error which I regret. It should not have happened. I now understand that in fact the address on it should really have been my home address as his agent. Mr McLeish knew nothing about this."
Would it be in order for the First Minister to tell us whether it is the case that the official election form EA3, which appoints an agent and states an official address, must be signed by the candidate—that is, Mr McLeish—himself? Would it be in order for him to tell us whether he signed that form, which had his parliamentary office address on it?
There are many more questions that I need to ask and would like to ask. However, in the interests of brevity I ask you, Presiding Officer, to make a ruling on my original point of order and tell us whether the First Minister has indeed made such a request.
First, I suggested to the Procedures Committee only two weeks ago that points of order should perhaps be limited to one minute. The Procedures Committee in its wisdom said no. Points of order can therefore still last for three minutes. Mr McLetchie was therefore in order.
I will now answer Mr McLetchie's questions. Yes, it would be in order for the First Minister to make a personal statement, but it would have to be put to me to decide whether he should make that statement or not. No, I have not received a request; and no, members could not then debate the personal statement, because the standing orders say so quite specifically.
I want to move on, because all this has taken time out of question time.