Time for Reflection
Good afternoon. The first item of business is time for reflection. Our time for reflection leader today is Father Raymond Jaconelli, abbot of Nunraw, Haddington.
Father Raymond Jaconelli (Abbot of Nunraw, Haddington):
Our Creator himself has told us:
"It's not good for man to be alone".
That saying has far wider implications than as a mere comment on marriage. The existence of this building and this Parliament are living witness to the saying's teaching that man is a social animal: he thrives and finds his fulfilment only in society, with his fellows. This Parliament considers the interplay between the various members of our society. It harmonises their needs and functions, it establishes their various obligations and commitments to the common good and so aims to create a peaceful and smooth-working whole.
All the various groups of society have their own particular function. The milkman and the bus driver are as necessary as the teacher or the artist. We think of Paul's wonderful description of the society of the church: it is like a human body with all its various parts. The hand needs the foot and the eye needs the ear; every part, great and small, has its function.
That brings me to my main point; namely, to make the plea that, among the groups that play a valid role in society, there is a place for those who dedicate their lives to prayer, praise, intercession and thanksgiving on behalf of all. So many of God's people—even those who believe in him—give so little thought to those very real obligations of our race. Society has its debt to God, and it is on behalf of society and, indeed, the whole human race, that some people feel called to the profession of a life that is dedicated to that role. The doctor needs the milkman, the teacher needs the nurse and the monk needs them all. But they in turn need—and benefit from—the dedicated life of the monk. He, too, has his role to play in society.
We might say that even God himself is bound by his own word that it is
"not good for man to be alone."
He, too, has to look on us not just as individuals, but as a family. What one member of the family does benefits all, precisely because they are a family. Is not that how the plan of redemption through Christ works?
So, may God bless this Parliament in all its deliberations, and deepen in it the conviction of the place of prayer in the welfare of society.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your advice about the revised guidance on time for reflection. The revised guidance states:
"The Presiding Officer will invite contributors to lead Time for Reflection",
but it also states that
"the text should be submitted in advance to the Clerk and the content … should not deviate from the text provided."
According to a report in this week's Sunday Herald, the revised guidance is a response to Cardinal Keith O'Brien's address during time for reflection on 22 December when, according to the Sunday Herald, he claimed
"that gays and lesbians were ‘captives to sexual aberration'",
an allegation that is also contained in motion S2M-2208, which also accused the cardinal of using
"the opportunity of Time for Reflection to make … a gratuitous insult to a section of the Scottish population".
From reading the Official Report of Cardinal O'Brien's speech, it is clear that he made no reference at all to the gay community and I have ascertained that no such reference was intended.
The revised guidance appears to be an over-reaction that has been prompted by people who misinterpreted or distorted Cardinal O'Brien's remarks. We are now faced with a preposterous proposal whereby religious leaders and others who are invited to lead time for reflection will, apparently, be required to submit their speeches for approval by the parliamentary authorities. That raises important questions, which I would like you to address, Presiding Officer. Will future contributors to time for reflection have their speeches vetted by you or by a parliamentary clerk? Is not this degree of control freakery bringing Parliament into disrepute and are not we setting a dangerous precedent? There would be justifiable outrage if members were required to submit their speeches for prior approval. Surely, if people are invited to address Parliament we should trust them to do so responsibly, instead of demeaning them by submitting their speeches to any form of vetting procedure. I would be grateful if you would consider that when inviting people to lead time for reflection.
Further to that point of order, Presiding Officer. Will you confirm that last week and again this week the Parliamentary Bureau made it absolutely clear that the revised guidance was part of a planned programme and was not a response to any comments that were made by Cardinal O'Brien or any other person?
Ms Marwick is quite correct: the bureau was clear that it was revising the guidance as part of a continuing programme of work across the whole Parliament to ensure that its communications comply with equalities legislation and best practice, and that the guidance was most certainly not revised in response to any individual or event. Any attempt to link the bureau's revision to Cardinal O'Brien is without foundation and is to be deplored.
On Mr Canavan's second point, draft texts of time for reflection contributions are submitted in advance to me, as Presiding Officer; that has been the practice since the start of the Parliament. I have a duty, as Presiding Officer, to ensure that nothing is said by an invited guest in this chamber that will reflect badly on Parliament or the wider community of Scotland.
Further to that point of order, Presiding Officer, I thank you for that explanation, but I am still unhappy about the addition to paragraph 2(g) of the guidance. Will you therefore seek parliamentary approval for the guidance? If not, I would like my dissent to be recorded.
I will reflect on that, Mr Canavan. I will not answer at short notice, but I will reflect on the matter and come back to you.