Official Report 288KB pdf
14:43
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I decided to raise a point of order to get advice from you and so that the Government front bench can listen and, I hope, respond.
The Presiding Officer will recall that, on 27 November, the Parliament had to meet in an emergency session to rush through legislation to fix a mistake in the Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Bill that the Scottish National Party took through the Parliament. During the course of the consideration of the bill, we found out that the Government knew about the issue months or weeks before it originally said that it did. There was confusion everywhere: Graeme Dey had to correct the Official Report and Ivan McKee had to be asked three or four times before we could finally get an answer from him. I lodged amendments to the bill in order to get important information from the Government. We heard from all sides of the chamber that transparency was paramount in the issue and that we should be well informed. My amendments were not successful, because the Government whipped its members to vote them down.
From the front bench, Ivan McKee gave a commitment and a guarantee that he would publish all the information that I had requested. Indeed, he urged me not to press my amendments, because he was going to publish the information anyway.
My question is: how long do we have to wait? That was the end of November last year. We are now into February 2026, and the Government has still not provided that information. Why is that? Did the minister, deliberately or otherwise, mislead Parliament when he said that he would release it? What powers do we, as back benchers, or do you, as Presiding Officer, have to force or compel the Government to provide the information that it said that it would? Indeed, it got support for opposing my amendments through its commitment to release that information.
As the Presiding Officer has made clear on a number of occasions, where commitments are made by ministers, the expectation is that those will be expedited as soon as possible. I am not aware of the detail of the undertaking that ministers made on that occasion. However, the ministers will have heard the point that you made, and the expectation would be that a response would be provided to you and to the chamber as quickly as possible. Without further reflection on the detail of the case, it is difficult to say more than that.
However, as I said, the expectation of the Presiding Officer is that, where commitments are made, there will be a response at the earliest opportunity.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance as to how a cabinet secretary can correct the record in this place. Repeatedly during portfolio questions, Shona Robison said that the Scottish Conservatives had proposed unfunded tax cuts of £1 billion. She is well aware that our plans are not unfunded, because last week we put on the record a detailed plan to cut £1 billion from the Scottish National Party’s ballooning benefit bill. How can the cabinet secretary correct the record to ensure that the public at large know that our budget adds up—unlike the SNP’s?
That is not on point of order, Mr Hoy. You are well aware of the response to similar interventions that have been made in the past. You have put your point on the record.
With that, we will pause briefly to allow a change of Presiding Officer.
Previous
Portfolio Question TimeNext
Hospitality