Business Motion
The next item of business is consideration of business motion S2M-1433, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme, together with one amendment to the motion.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I ask for your guidance in relation to the amendment to business motion S2M-1433. The amendment calls for the insertion of ministerial statements to the business programme. I understand that standing orders provide for ministerial statements to be made only when there has been a request or upon notice given by a minister that they wish to make a statement, at which point the bureau may make provision in the business programme. Indeed, in the case of an urgent statement, the Presiding Officer has the discretion to take it. Given that there does not appear to be a method by which a ministerial statement might be required, how can the business programme be amended to include ministerial statements if no minister has requested one?
First, I thank the member for giving me advance notice of his point of order, which has just given rise to 20 minutes of most interesting discussion.
Any amendment to a business motion that receives the support of 10 or more members must be taken by the Parliament. I do not have any discretion over selection in such circumstances. In relation to the competence of the amendment, there is nothing in the standing orders to rule it out of order. However, Mr Smith is perfectly correct to point out that it is not possible under standing orders to compel a minister to make a statement to the Parliament. As a result, if the amendment were agreed to, the effect of any subsequent resolution would be unclear. I suggest that members bear that in mind for future reference when lodging amendments to business motions.
I now call Patricia Ferguson to move motion S2M-1433.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees the following programme of business—
Wednesday 16 June 2004
2.30 pm Time for Reflection
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Executive Debate on Family Matters: Improving Family Law in Scotland
followed by Business Motion
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members' Business
Thursday 17 June 2004
9.30 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Stage 3 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill
12 noon First Minister's Question Time
1.30 pm Question Time—
Enterprise, Lifelong Learning and Transport;
Justice and Law Officers;
General Questions
2.30 pm Continuation of Stage 3 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.30 pm Decision Time
Wednesday 23 June 2004
2.30 pm Time for Reflection
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Stage 3 of the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill
followed by Business Motion
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members' Business
Thursday 24 June 2004
9.30 am Committee Business
12 noon First Minister's Question Time
2.00 pm Question Time—
Education and Young People, Tourism, Culture and Sport;
Finance and Public Services and Communities;
General Questions
3.00 pm Stage 1 Debate on the School Education (Ministerial Powers and Independent Schools) (Scotland) Bill
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members' Business.—[Patricia Ferguson.]
Irrespective of the niceties of standing orders, the purpose of my amendment is self-evident. We seek to ensure that ministers acknowledge their responsibilities and come to the chamber to provide appropriate explanations when matters of the greatest concern that affect many people in Scotland come to the fore.
The secondary issue set out in the amendment concerns Scottish Opera's future. I say "secondary", but I am sure that it does not feel secondary to the many people in Scottish Opera whose jobs are likely to be under threat as a result of the announcements that were made the other day. It is perfectly true that the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport has issued a letter of explanation; however, as is frequently the case from that source, the explanation raises more questions than it provides answers. I really think that he should come to the chamber and provide a more detailed explanation in the form of a ministerial statement.
The principal issue raised in the amendment is slopping out. If we bear in mind the history of this debacle, I find it astonishing that the appeal was not lodged timeously. An explanation is required and it is up to the Minister for Justice to give it. Fortunately, this morning the Court of Session agreed to hear the appeal, which for the moment—and I stress that phrase—spares the Executive's blushes and an awful lot of taxpayers' money.
I understand that the appeal against Lord Bonomy's judgment is based only on the findings of the European Court of Human Rights, not on the position in common law. That makes a statement even more urgent.
The appeal will be determined in due course by people who are much better qualified to do so than any of us. However, the following questions need to be answered urgently. First, given the limited grounds of its appeal, is the Executive admitting liability on the common law of reparation? Secondly, is the appeal restricted only to cases that involve remand prisoners? Thirdly, have any estimates been made on the potential liabilities or the number of cases that might be involved? Fourthly, when will this particular Minister for Justice face up to her responsibilities and come to the chamber to answer for them, which is something that she has manifestly failed to do on so many issues?
Regardless of the result of this vote, the day must come when the minister will have to face up to her responsibilities. If she does not, we will certainly find a device within the standing orders to ensure that she comes to the chamber to answer for the blunders that have been the theme of her department over the past few months.
I move amendment S2M-1433.1, that after
"followed by Executive Debate on Family Matters: Improving Family Law in Scotland"
insert
"4.00 pm Ministerial Statement on Slopping Out
4.30 pm Ministerial Statement on Scottish Opera".
I wish to oppose the business motion. Indeed, I indicated my intention to do so at yesterday's meeting of the Parliamentary Bureau when the request for a statement on slopping out was refused.
On 12 May, the Minister for Justice announced her intention to lodge an appeal against Lord Bonomy's judgment on the Napier case. The Scottish National Party supported that decision, because ending the practice of slopping out in our prisons is long overdue. It is inhumane and degrading and has no place in Scotland. After all, this is the 21st century and the penal system should seek to rehabilitate prisoners as well as punish them. We should remember that prison officers, who have to supervise slopping out, also have human rights.
The Executive should be held to account for its wilful failure over several years to invest in the prison estate. The warnings have been clear and stark. That said, many members—I and others throughout the chamber—who abhor the practice of slopping out, question whether we should financially compensate convicted criminals. That is why it is in the public interest that the judgment is tested in court.
Of course, as we all know, despite the statement a month ago, appeal papers were not lodged with the Court of Session in time. We learned today that Lord Cullen deemed that that was an inadvertent mistake and that he allowed the Executive more time to lodge its appeal. The minister and the Executive must have heaved huge sighs of relief at that ruling, because the potential bill of several millions of pounds in compensation payments could exceed the cost of ending slopping out. Of course, if the appeal were lost, the Executive would find itself in the position of paying compensation anyway. However, that would happen after due process of law and not because of the Executive's incompetence.
In these circumstances, it is vital that the Executive comes before the Parliament to account for the mistake that was made. I am aware that the Minister for Justice briefly updated the Justice 2 Committee yesterday and confirmed that an internal inquiry was under way. However, the Executive must accept responsibility for its actions and those of its civil servants, and the rights of any employees concerned must be protected.
When there is already speculation in the press about how the mistake happened, it is only right that the Parliament as a whole is apprised of the facts and afforded an opportunity to question the Minister for Justice. Therefore, in the absence of a statement, the SNP opposes the business motion.
I will take the issues in chronological order and begin with Scottish Opera. It is my belief, and the Executive's, that a ministerial statement at this time is unnecessary. Full disclosure of the Executive's position and the rationale behind it has already been made to all MSPs by individual letter on 7 June—as Mr Aitken was kind enough to acknowledge—and in the written reply to a parliamentary question on 7 June.
As I think that most MSPs will recognise, the needs of Scottish Opera's staff and the legal obligations of its board to inform them of any decision were paramount in the consideration of how best to inform MSPs of events. The written information to which I referred was provided to all MSPs as soon as it was possible to do so. There is no further information that ministers could provide to the Parliament that is not in the public domain and that is additional to that held by MSPs.
I now come to the Napier judgment. I can indicate to Parliament that the Lord Advocate and the Minister for Justice will jointly write to the conveners of the justice committees. In those letters, they will explain the reasons for the Executive's failure to lodge the appeal timeously; outline the action taken as a result of that failure; and describe the grounds of appeal. As the case is now sub judice, it will not be proper for me to discuss its details or the merits of the arguments.
There are two questions to be put as a result of this short debate. The first question is, that amendment S2M-1433.1, in the name of Bill Aitken, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
No.
There will be a division.
For
Adam, Brian (Aberdeen North) (SNP)
Aitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con)
Baird, Shiona (North East Scotland) (Green)
Ballance, Chris (South of Scotland) (Green)
Ballard, Mark (Lothians) (Green)
Davidson, Mr David (North East Scotland) (Con)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James (Lothians) (Con)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP)
Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (Con)
Fox, Colin (Lothians) (SSP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Miss Annabel (West of Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (South of Scotland) (SNP)
Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Green)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Ingram, Mr Adam (South of Scotland) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Marwick, Tricia (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Mather, Jim (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Maxwell, Mr Stewart (West of Scotland) (SNP)
McFee, Mr Bruce (West of Scotland) (SNP)
McGrigor, Mr Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McLetchie, David (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con)
Milne, Mrs Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Monteith, Mr Brian (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mundell, David (South of Scotland) (Con)
Neil, Alex (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mr Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow) (SNP)
Welsh, Mr Andrew (Angus) (SNP)
Against
Alexander, Ms Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab)
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Barrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Edinburgh Central) (Lab)
Brankin, Rhona (Midlothian) (Lab)
Brown, Robert (Glasgow) (LD)
Butler, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
Craigie, Cathie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab)
Curran, Ms Margaret (Glasgow Baillieston) (Lab)
Deacon, Susan (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)
Eadie, Helen (Dunfermline East) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab)
Finnie, Ross (West of Scotland) (LD)
Gillon, Karen (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Godman, Trish (West Renfrewshire) (Lab)
Gorrie, Donald (Central Scotland) (LD)
Henry, Hugh (Paisley South) (Lab)
Home Robertson, Mr John (East Lothian) (Lab)
Hughes, Janis (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab)
Jackson, Dr Sylvia (Stirling) (Lab)
Jamieson, Cathy (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab)
Jamieson, Margaret (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab)
Kerr, Mr Andy (East Kilbride) (Lab)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (LD)
Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab)
Macintosh, Mr Kenneth (Eastwood) (Lab)
Maclean, Kate (Dundee West) (Lab)
Macmillan, Maureen (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab)
May, Christine (Central Fife) (Lab)
McAveety, Mr Frank (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab)
McCabe, Mr Tom (Hamilton South) (Lab)
McConnell, Mr Jack (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
McMahon, Michael (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab)
McNeil, Mr Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab)
McNulty, Des (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab)
Morrison, Mr Alasdair (Western Isles) (Lab)
Muldoon, Bristow (Livingston) (Lab)
Mulligan, Mrs Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab)
Munro, John Farquhar (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD)
Murray, Dr Elaine (Dumfries) (Lab)
Oldfather, Irene (Cunninghame South) (Lab)
Peacock, Peter (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Peattie, Cathy (Falkirk East) (Lab)
Pringle, Mike (Edinburgh South) (LD)
Purvis, Jeremy (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)
Radcliffe, Nora (Gordon) (LD)
Raffan, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Robson, Euan (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD)
Rumbles, Mike (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland) (LD)
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Smith, Iain (North East Fife) (LD)
Smith, Margaret (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Stephen, Nicol (Aberdeen South) (LD)
Stone, Mr Jamie (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)
Swinburne, John (Central Scotland) (SSCUP)
Wallace, Mr Jim (Orkney) (LD)
Watson, Mike (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab)
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
Wilson, Allan (Cunninghame North) (Lab)
The result of the division is: For 36, Against 65, Abstentions 0.
Amendment disagreed to.
The second question is, that motion S2M-1433, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
No.
There will be a division.
For
Alexander, Ms Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab)
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Barrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Edinburgh Central) (Lab)
Brankin, Rhona (Midlothian) (Lab)
Brown, Robert (Glasgow) (LD)
Butler, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
Craigie, Cathie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab)
Curran, Ms Margaret (Glasgow Baillieston) (Lab)
Deacon, Susan (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)
Eadie, Helen (Dunfermline East) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab)
Finnie, Ross (West of Scotland) (LD)
Gillon, Karen (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Godman, Trish (West Renfrewshire) (Lab)
Gorrie, Donald (Central Scotland) (LD)
Henry, Hugh (Paisley South) (Lab)
Home Robertson, Mr John (East Lothian) (Lab)
Hughes, Janis (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab)
Jackson, Dr Sylvia (Stirling) (Lab)
Jamieson, Cathy (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab)
Jamieson, Margaret (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab)
Kerr, Mr Andy (East Kilbride) (Lab)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (LD)
Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab)
Macintosh, Mr Kenneth (Eastwood) (Lab)
Maclean, Kate (Dundee West) (Lab)
Macmillan, Maureen (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab)
May, Christine (Central Fife) (Lab)
McAveety, Mr Frank (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab)
McCabe, Mr Tom (Hamilton South) (Lab)
McConnell, Mr Jack (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
McMahon, Michael (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab)
McNeil, Mr Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab)
McNulty, Des (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab)
Morrison, Mr Alasdair (Western Isles) (Lab)
Muldoon, Bristow (Livingston) (Lab)
Mulligan, Mrs Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab)
Munro, John Farquhar (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD)
Murray, Dr Elaine (Dumfries) (Lab)
Oldfather, Irene (Cunninghame South) (Lab)
Peacock, Peter (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Peattie, Cathy (Falkirk East) (Lab)
Pringle, Mike (Edinburgh South) (LD)
Purvis, Jeremy (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)
Radcliffe, Nora (Gordon) (LD)
Raffan, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Robson, Euan (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD)
Rumbles, Mike (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland) (LD)
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Smith, Iain (North East Fife) (LD)
Smith, Margaret (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Stephen, Nicol (Aberdeen South) (LD)
Stone, Mr Jamie (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)
Swinburne, John (Central Scotland) (SSCUP)
Wallace, Mr Jim (Orkney) (LD)
Watson, Mike (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab)
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
Wilson, Allan (Cunninghame North) (Lab)
Against
Adam, Brian (Aberdeen North) (SNP)
Aitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con)
Baird, Shiona (North East Scotland) (Green)
Ballance, Chris (South of Scotland) (Green)
Ballard, Mark (Lothians) (Green)
Brocklebank, Mr Ted (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Davidson, Mr David (North East Scotland) (Con)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James (Lothians) (Con)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP)
Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (Con)
Fox, Colin (Lothians) (SSP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Miss Annabel (West of Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (South of Scotland) (SNP)
Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Green)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Ingram, Mr Adam (South of Scotland) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Marwick, Tricia (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Mather, Jim (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Maxwell, Mr Stewart (West of Scotland) (SNP)
McFee, Mr Bruce (West of Scotland) (SNP)
McGrigor, Mr Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McLetchie, David (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con)
Milne, Mrs Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Monteith, Mr Brian (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mundell, David (South of Scotland) (Con)
Neil, Alex (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mr Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow) (SNP)
Welsh, Mr Andrew (Angus) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 65, Against 37, Abstentions 0.
Motion agreed to.
That the Parliament agrees the following programme of business—
Wednesday 16 June 2004
2.30 pm Time for Reflection
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Executive Debate on Family Matters: Improving Family Law in Scotland
followed by Business Motion
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members' Business
Thursday 17 June 2004
9.30 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Stage 3 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill
12 noon First Minister's Question Time
1.30 pm Question Time—
Enterprise, Lifelong Learning and Transport;
Justice and Law Officers;
General Questions
2.30 pm Continuation of Stage 3 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Bill
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.30 pm Decision Time
Wednesday 23 June 2004
2.30 pm Time for Reflection
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Stage 3 of the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill
followed by Business Motion
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members' Business
Thursday 24 June 2004
9.30 am Committee Business
12 noon First Minister's Question Time
2.00 pm Question Time—
Education and Young People, Tourism, Culture and Sport;
Finance and Public Services and Communities;
General Questions
3.00 pm Stage 1 Debate on the School Education (Ministerial Powers and Independent Schools) (Scotland) Bill
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members' Business.