Chamber and committees

Plenary, 13 Feb 2002

Meeting date: Wednesday, February 13, 2002

Parliamentary Bureau Motion

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):

Order. The next item of business is consideration of a Parliamentary Bureau motion and an amendment to that motion. As today is the first time that an amendment has been lodged to a business motion, I want to explain the procedure.

Standing orders state that there can be only one speaker for and one against the business motion and any amendment to that motion. Today, therefore, there will be four speakers. No one else has the right to contribute to the debate. Each of the speakers will have a maximum of five minutes—they do not need to take all that time—and the debate cannot last longer than 30 minutes.

I ask Euan Robson to move motion S1M-2742, which is a timetabling motion on the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill.

The Deputy Minister for Parliamentary Business (Euan Robson):

The motion has been agreed with all the main political parties and has been lodged in consultation both with those who are leading for and with those who are leading against the bill. Overall, the motion provides sufficient time for consideration of the 23 groups of amendments, although a business-like approach will obviously be required. The timetable compares favourably with that for stage 3 of the Housing (Scotland) Bill, when 200 amendments in 32 groups were disposed of in a shorter period.

It is important to remember that the purpose of the timetabling motion is not to inhibit proper examination of legislation, but to structure the debate to ensure that sufficient time is allowed for later groupings. That is in line with the consultative steering group recommendations.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that, at Stage 3 of the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill, debate on each part of the proceedings shall be brought to a conclusion by the time-limits indicated (each time-limit being calculated from when Stage 3 begins and excluding any periods when the meeting is suspended)—

Group 1 to Group 3—no later than 45 minutes

Group 4 to Group 6—no later than 1 hour 45 minutes

Group 7 to Group 10—no later than 2 hours 15 minutes

Group 11—no later than 2 hours 45 minutes

Group 12 to Group 18—no later than 3 hours 30 minutes

Group 19—no later than 4 hours 15 minutes

Group 20 to Group 22—no later than 4 hours 45 minutes

Group 23—no later than 5 hours

Motion to pass the Bill—no later than 6 hours.

Alex Johnstone (North-East Scotland) (Con):

The reason why I lodged amendment S1M-2742.1 is that which I made clear two weeks ago, when I first saw the provisional business motion. I am seriously concerned that we are about to amend the bill in such a radical manner that, at the end of the debate, it may be difficult to work out exactly what we are debating. For that reason, it is important that an appropriate time elapses between the completion of amendments and the debate on the motion to pass the bill.

I move amendment S1M-2742.1, to leave out "no later than 6 hours" and insert:

"to be taken on another day."

The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Patricia Ferguson):

I must say that I cannot help but think that Mr Johnstone is simply employing a delaying tactic. As my colleague Mr Robson has indicated, the motion was discussed and agreed by all the business managers. Despite the fact that he was given ample opportunity to do so, Mr Johnstone did not find it necessary to raise this issue at yesterday's meeting of the Parliamentary Bureau. As he has made no attempt to discuss the amendment with the business managers before today, I find it difficult to understand why he has now decided to move the amendment.

As far back as 31 January, Mr Johnstone has had opportunities to debate his suggestion in the chamber. Tomorrow's debate on the Water Industry (Scotland) Bill—for which more amendments have been lodged for than for today's debate—will be dealt with expeditiously, yet I have not had any complaints about the timetabling of that debate. If Mr Johnstone and his members have any difficulty in keeping track of what happens this afternoon, there are plenty of other members in the chamber who will be happy to assist them.

Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):

I will not detain the chamber long, because the issue is fairly straightforward. It is worth pointing out that, when this was first canvassed at the bureau, it was agreed—as the Minister for Parliamentary Business said—but with the caveat that if there were a substantial number of amendments, there could be difficulties. I was not present, but I am advised that Mr Johnstone raised the matter at the bureau two weeks ago. He certainly raised it in the chamber two weeks ago. Unless we want a great deal of confusion, there will have to be a separation of the debate into two days. We will adhere to that line.