Plenary, 12 Dec 2007

Meeting date: Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Official Report 405KB pdf

---

Business Motion

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S3M-1014, in the name of Bruce Crawford, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees the following programme of business—

Wednesday 19 December 2007

2.30 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Scottish Government Debate: EU Reform Treaty

followed by Business Motion

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business

Thursday 20 December 2007

9.15 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 1 Debate: Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill

11.40 am General Question Time

12 noon First Minister's Question Time

2.15 pm Themed Question Time

Finance and Sustainable Growth

2.55 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Abolition of Bridge Tolls (Scotland) Bill

followed by Legislative Consent Motion: Climate Change Bill – UK Legislation

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business

Wednesday 9 January 2008

2.30 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Scottish Government Business

followed by Business Motion

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business

Thursday 10 January 2008

9.15 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Labour Party Business

11.40 am General Question Time

12 noon First Minister's Question Time

2.15 pm Themed Question Time

Education and Lifelong Learning;

Europe, External Affairs and Culture

2.55 pm Scottish Government Business

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business—[Bruce Crawford.]

I will speak against the motion. Presiding Officer, you are aware that I requested at the meeting of the Parliamentary Bureau that the Scottish Government make a statement on the circumstances surrounding the planning application from the Trump Organization to build a golf course, hotel and housing in Aberdeenshire. My request was not taken on board, which is unfortunate, so I am forced to bring the matter to the attention of the Parliament.

At the outset I want to say that the position of Labour members and probably many other members is one of broad support for the proposal. We acknowledge that it represents significant investment in north-east Scotland and could be regarded as being of national importance from a tourism perspective—never mind an economic perspective. Our concern centres on the process that has been followed and on the alleged actions of the First Minister, which have the potential to open the matter up to judicial review, which would be unfortunate, given that the delay arising from any legal challenge would be significant.

Our purpose in requesting a statement is to provide ministers, in particular the First Minister, with an opportunity to clarify the confusion that has surrounded the proposal during the past few days. Questions need to be answered. What mechanism was followed for the call-in? Had the decision letter been issued? On what grounds was the application called in? Was the application notified to ministers and, if so, by whom? Was it notified by the local authority, as is set out in the town and country planning notification of applications direction of 2007? What is the timetable following the call-in? Will the application be decided on the basis of written submissions to reporters, an informal hearing or a full public inquiry? How long will that take?

Planning professionals tell me that what has happened is "unprecedented". It is therefore essential that the Government is open and transparent about the process and I urge it to make a statement to the Parliament.

It is of the utmost importance that the First Minister should clarify his position. Was he acting as a constituency member? If so, why was a Government car used, and why have comments on the matter subsequently been issued to the press from the First Minister's spokesman and not a constituency spokesman? Does the First Minister not realise that he needs to separate his two roles completely, not just by saying that they are separate but by demonstrating that they are separate in everything he does? Was he really not aware that the application—for a development in his own back yard—was being called in the next day? That is why we need a statement.

The Government must do nothing that jeopardises a fair and balanced hearing for the project. It is time for ministers to clear up the confusion. The Scottish National Party's business manager suggested at the bureau meeting that perhaps First Minister's question time would offer just such an opportunity. I remind members that, only last week, three members asked the First Minister about the Trump proposals. That was on 6 December. The First Minister made no mention of his meeting with the Trump representatives three days earlier.

I am sure that you agree, Presiding Officer, that the bearpit of First Minister's question time, which generates more heat than light, is not the place in which to consider matters of such sensitivity.

The latest, informed suggestion from the Aberdeen Evening Express is that a decision will be made before Christmas. I am not opposed to having a speedier planning service, but such a timescale would be breathtakingly fast. Indeed, one wonders whether due process could be followed in such a short timescale.

The project is hugely important to the north-east of Scotland, and to Scotland as a whole. For that reason, ministers should make a statement to the chamber, to clarify matters. I ask them to reflect again.

I will give the Minister for Parliamentary Business an opportunity to respond.

I respect Jackie Baillie's right to raise matters in the chamber as she sees fit, but at the bureau meeting this week she raised the issue of a statement from the First Minister—the Labour Party has widened the issue into the rather fictitious process that we are hearing from her today. Frankly, the request is not a proper one to make, particularly given the importance of the matters that are set down for debate, as detailed in the business motion.

Jackie Baillie knows fine well that the First Minister is answerable to the chamber in his ministerial capacity. If any MSP has a question to put to him in that capacity, he is delighted to give an answer. He does that every Thursday at 12 noon. [Applause.]

Order.

As members well know, Mr Salmond met representatives of the Trump Organization. Indeed, he also met representatives of sustainable Aberdeenshire and other objectors. He did so in his capacity as the constituency MSP for Gordon. As the local MSP, he is debarred from involvement in the planning process for the proposed golf development. Indeed, being so debarred, Mr Salmond can pursue his bounden duties as a constituency MSP, as required under the parliamentary code of conduct for members.

Mr Salmond is accountable to the Parliament not as the MSP for Gordon, but as the First Minister. In the former role, he is ultimately accountable to the electorate, and the people of Gordon delivered a handsome victory for him in May. I apologise to Nicol Stephen for reminding him of that.

There is no confusion. There is not a scintilla of doubt that Mr Salmond met the Trump representatives as a constituency MSP. He made that point at the outset of every meeting—[Interruption.]

Order.

Mr Salmond has made the same point to every person to whom he has spoken.

There are clear and proper procedures under which the First Minister makes statements to the chamber, in that capacity, at First Minister's question time. There are also clear and proper procedures under which members can scrutinise the First Minister. Members are exercising those procedures: there have been 38 parliamentary questions and four freedom of information requests on the matter, and Ms Baillie has written to the First Minister and the permanent secretary. All those questions, requests and letters will be answered in the normal way. That is the right way for the Parliament to go about its business. Members should not play games with parliamentary business or put in jeopardy a potentially significant investment for Scotland.

As a loyal helper to Wendy Alexander, I assume that Ms Baillie will advise her leader to ask the appropriate questions on the matter tomorrow, at First Minister's question time. I look forward to that.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Given what the Minister for Parliamentary Business has just said, is it in order for the First Minister to answer questions on the Trump planning application?

The rules state fairly clearly that the First Minister answers questions on matters for which he has general responsibility.

Thank you for clarifying that matter, Presiding Officer.

I look forward to hearing, tomorrow, the leader of the Labour Party asking the important questions that Jackie Baillie has raised. If those questions are not asked, we will know just how spurious the argument from the Labour Party has been.

Further to the point of order, Presiding Officer. In his speech, Mr Crawford indicated—[Interruption.]

Order.

Presiding Officer, you said that the First Minister can answer questions, at First Minister's question time, on matters that are within his general responsibility. Mr Crawford has indicated that the First Minister has absented himself from his responsibility as First Minister in relation to the proposal, because he is the constituency member—so how can he be questioned as the First Minister on an issue on which he has absented himself from decision making?

I am sure that it is not beyond some of the more experienced members to phrase their questions so that they fall within the First Minister's general area of responsibility. I cannot clarify that point any further at present.

The question is, that motion S3M-1014, in the name of Bruce Crawford, be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

That the Parliament agrees the following programme of business—

Wednesday 19 December 2007

2.30 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Scottish Government Debate: EU Reform Treaty

followed by Business Motion

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business

Thursday 20 December 2007

9.15 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 1 Debate: Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill

11.40 am General Question Time

12 noon First Minister's Question Time

2.15 pm Themed Question Time

Finance and Sustainable Growth

2.55 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Abolition of Bridge Tolls (Scotland) Bill

followed by Legislative Consent Motion: Climate Change Bill – UK Legislation

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business

Wednesday 9 January 2008

2.30 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Scottish Government Business

followed by Business Motion

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business

Thursday 10 January 2008

9.15 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Labour Party Business

11.40 am General Question Time

12 noon First Minister's Question Time

2.15 pm Themed Question Time

Education and Lifelong Learning;

Europe, External Affairs and Culture

2.55 pm Scottish Government Business

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business