Meeting of the Parliament [Draft] Business until 18:50.

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026

Official Report 1071KB pdf

Point of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek a ruling from you on standing orders rule 17.2.1(a), on suspending rule 13.8.1.

Rule 13.8.1 relates to the lodging of urgent questions and states that they must be lodged by 10 am on the day that they are to be taken. If we can agree to suspend standing orders to vary the time—the time only—in rule 13.8.1, I can resubmit my urgent question for you to consider on whether ministers should be brought to the Parliament today to speak about the Scottish Government’s written case that has now been presented in the judicial review petitioned for by For Women Scotland on the Scottish Prison Service’s transgender prisoner policy.

Two weeks ago, you rightly said during First Minister’s questions that the Parliament should not be “a library”—I agree with that—but the Parliament should also be a Parliament. Surely, on an issue of importance such as this, on which there have been cross-party questions to the Government, we should act as a Parliament and hear from ministers on the same day that the information is made public.

I also note that, in response to my asking a question on this topic last week, the First Minister said:

“The Government is trying to make information available to ensure that members of the public ... can follow the case in a well-informed way.”—[Official Report, 15 January 2026; c 20.]

We will be able to follow the case in a well-informed way by questioning ministers.

As I said to the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans, the information came out in a Government press release at 9.46 am. There was no Government-initiated question to alert every MSP to it, and to the best of my knowledge, there was no offer from the Government for a minister to make a statement. Therefore, our only recourse, as Opposition parties and back-bench MSPs, is through an urgent question.

I fully accept that, when I lodged my urgent question, it was beyond the time limit, but there are compelling reasons for the issue to be debated today in the Parliament, through ministers answering questions. Therefore, I seek your guidance on how I can move a motion under rule 17.2.1(a) to suspend rule 13.8.1 to allow an urgent question to be considered today.

Thank you, Mr Ross, and I appreciate advance notice of your intention to raise the matter. I am not minded today to accept a motion without notice. I think that my determination to ensure that all members have an opportunity to scrutinise the Government fully and regularly, whether that be through urgent questions or the selection of other questions, is very clear to the Parliament. I remind Mr Ross of the other opportunities that exist, and which are available to him this week.