Chamber and committees

Meeting of the Parliament [Last updated 17:05]

Meeting date: Thursday, June 4, 2026

Parliamentary Bureau Motions

The Presiding Officer (Kenneth Gibson)

Good afternoon, colleagues. The first item of business is consideration of four Parliamentary Bureau motions: S7M-00268, on a standing orders temporary rule change; S7M-00269, on the establishment of committees; S7M-00270, on names and remits of mandatory committees; and S7M-00273, on the election of committee conveners. I ask any member who wishes to speak to the motions to press their request-to-speak button.

13:30

Craig Hoy (Dumfriesshire) (Con)

I rise not to oppose the formation of committees but to challenge the Government over its latest attempt to undermine fair scrutiny of the decisions that it takes.

The Scottish National Party has chosen to nominate one of its own as convener of the finance committee and to take on the position of deputy convener. That contrasts with the previous session of the Parliament, in which an MSP from an Opposition party took on the role of deputy. With a huge focus during this parliamentary session set to be on the Government’s finances, it is sadly predictable that the secretive SNP Government has grabbed those two vital positions. MSPs are rightly concerned about a £5 billion budget black hole, so would it not have been better for the SNP to allow Opposition politicians to lead the scrutiny of the Government’s finances? Has John Swinney learned no lessons from the SNP’s financial scandal about the importance of transparency and independent audit and about the separation of powers? He clearly has not. The SNP has learned no lessons.

Who might emerge in those two key roles? In the previous session, the Presiding Officer was the convener of the predecessor committee. He showed grit, determination and independence of mind from the SNP, but is the SNP about to propose a pair of party patsies to rubber-stamp its budget in the Parliament? Will it be the eagle-eyed Colin Beattie or will Kirsten Oswald be swapped from her ministerial brief? Those two MSPs apparently failed to spot £400,000 being stolen from under their noses.

People will not be surprised that SNP ministers are trying to hijack the finance committee, but it flies in the face of one of the fundamental principles of the Parliament—that the committee system should be independent of Government and doggedly hold it to account.

The Scottish Conservatives are in line to secure the convenership of the Social Justice, Housing and Local Government Committee, which will oversee 41 per cent of the Government’s expenditure. We will use our presence on that committee to properly scrutinise the Scottish Government and its bloated SNP benefits bill.

MSPs from all parties in the chamber were elected to the Parliament to question the Government and safeguard their constituents’ interests and the taxes that they pay. However, the SNP’s power grab on the finance committee is akin to putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank. Therefore, I urge all MSPs, regardless of their party, to use the committee system that the Parliament will agree today to hold the Government to account properly. Ministers might be frightened of transparency and routinely seek to avoid scrutiny, so they might not like that, but it is what we are paid to do on behalf of our constituents.

Although we will not stand in the way of the formation of committees, the Scottish Conservatives are putting down a very strong marker before ministers. People have had enough of their secrecy. It is time to open the books.

The Presiding Officer

I call the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans to respond and to move the four motions.

13:33

The Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans (Jamie Hepburn)

It was “Cry Me a River” from Craig Hoy. How desperate and sad it was. It is no wonder that the Scottish Conservatives are a reduced rump in the Parliament.

The Parliamentary Bureau has spent the past few weeks discussing and agreeing the committee remits and convenerships. We have done so collaboratively and collegiately. We have done it together without rancour and division. Yes, there has been debate and it has resulted in the proposals that are before the Parliament.

The number of members from each party on the committees is largely based on d’Hondt calculations, to try to ensure fairness across committees. That has been the method used since devolution. The reason that I say it is largely based on d’Hondt is that one party would have been entitled to more committee places under that formula: the Scottish National Party.

Stephen Kerr (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)

I hear what the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans is saying about process, which is something that the SNP loves to obsess about, but this is about what it looks like. It is unseemly that both of the convenership roles in that vitally important committee are with the Government party. Can he not see that that just stinks?

Jamie Hepburn

There is another river that could be cried; I will come to that point in a minute.

The point that I was going to make is that three committee places that the Scottish National Party were entitled to have been given up, such that Reform UK, Scottish Labour and the Scottish Conservatives are each getting an additional place in the committee structure that we are proposing. If anything, I could have been the person who was speaking against the motion and saying that it was terribly unfair, but I am a very reasonable person, which is why I am standing here proposing this structure.

I remind members that the SNP will be a minority on all committees, no matter whether it has a convenership or not. Any suggestion that the SNP group will somehow dominate a committee is clearly not true.

Craig Hoy might not like this, but choices on committee convenerships and deputy convenerships were made based on the d’Hondt method. That procedure has been in place since the Parliament was established. Indeed, only one party has been restricted from taking up one of those posts—standing orders prescribe that, and I am not suggesting otherwise. Only one party is restricted from taking up a convenership on the Public Audit Committee. Everything else is to be legitimately allocated in line with the d’Hondt method. Former business managers each made their choices, and the motion is based on those choices. Every single decision has been taken in line with the standing orders of Parliament—[Interruption.] I hear members saying, “Process, process, process!” That is right—this is about the process. That is what the motion is about, Mr Kerr. It is about the process of establishing committees. I think that Mr Kerr should be paying attention.

Mr Hoy is talking about what the situation was in the previous session. He has been here for only one session, so he is still quite new and is still learning. Mr Hoy still has a lot to learn. The finance committee having a governing party convener is not new. Labour held the convenerships in sessions 1 and 2 and also had the deputy convenership in session 1. In session 4, the Government party had both the convenership—a very good convener I thought at the time—and the deputy convenership. I am afraid to say that members can cry about it all they want, but there is nothing new here.

Mr Hoy is talking about the committees that the Conservative Party is about to get convenerships of. If Mr Hoy is speaking against the motion and is about to vote against it, I have to say that, if he is successful, he will not get those convenerships.

I urge Parliament to vote for the motions today.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees, with effect from 4 June 2026, that Temporary Rule 4, under rule 17.1A, be amended as follows—

(a) in paragraph 1, for “2 October 2026” substitute “31 January 2027”;

(b) for “Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee” substitute “Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee”;

“(b) policy in relation to the UK’s relationship with the EU;”

(d) in paragraph 3, for subparagraph (d) substitute:

“(d) any other matter falling within the responsibility of the Scottish Administration relating to devolution, intra-UK and intergovernmental relations; and”

(e) in paragraph 3, at end insert:

“(e) matters relating to culture within the responsibility of the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic.”

That the Parliament shall establish committees of the Parliament as follows—

Name of Committee: Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Remit: Set out in Rule 6.4

Number of members: 5

Convenership: The Convener will be a member of the Scottish National Party and the Deputy Convener will be a member of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party.