Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Plenary, 06 Feb 2002

Meeting date: Wednesday, February 6, 2002


Contents


Points of Order

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I refer to today's announcement by the Scottish Executive of the new appointees to the Scottish Agricultural Wages Board, to which Mrs Christine Davis CBE has been reappointed as chairperson. The Scottish Executive stated in its announcement that neither she nor any other board member holds any other post by public appointment. However, Mrs Christine Davis is, in fact, a member of the independent assessors' panel for public appointments. Do you think that you could use the powers of your office to get the Scottish Executive to tell us the truth for a change, Presiding Officer?

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel):

No. I do not think that I should use the powers of my office to do anything of the kind. That was not really a point of order for me. It might be a point of argument with the Executive, but it is certainly not a point of order for this chamber.

Fiona Hyslop (Lothians) (SNP):

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. You will note from today's business bulletin that a number of the amendments for the stage 3 debate that we are about to have were submitted after the deadline. We agreed at our debate on standing orders last week to accept manuscript amendments where they are justified. I ask you to reflect on standing order 9.10.6 and to consider producing guidance to members about what would constitute justifiable manuscript amendments.

There is agreement across the parties that we should facilitate the resolution of technical and legal issues where necessary, but we cannot allow last-minute amendments to be used at any time in the future for behind-the-scenes political fixes. If at all possible, will you give guidance to members that it might be helpful if amendments were lodged before the day of the deadline to allow amendments to amendments to be discussed fully and openly in the chamber?

The Presiding Officer:

I am grateful to the member for giving me notice of the point of order; it is an important one. Members will recall that we changed the standing orders only last week. I read the Procedures Committee's report on the subject, which made it clear that it did not expect the manuscript amendment process to be used as a matter of routine. It is an exceptional process and should be used when last-minute technical changes have to be made to a bill. I have the task of deciding whether those amendments are in order.

It is unfortunate that, on the first outing, within two days of making those changes to standing orders, these manuscript amendments were lodged. I say in passing that I hope that that does not become a habit, because that would go against the spirit of what members agreed.

I have to say also that I selected the amendments because I believe that they match the tone of the Health and Community Care Committee's deliberations on the bill. They also ensure that an amendment that the Parliament wants to agree to is legislatively correct. That is why they were selected.

I share the member's anxiety, however, that that should not become a habit and I record that from the chair.