Plenary, 20 Apr 2006
Meeting date: Thursday, April 20, 2006
Official Report
708KB pdf
Parliamentary Bureau Motions
The next item of business is consideration of six Parliamentary Bureau motions. I ask Margaret Curran to move motions S2M-4259, S2M-4260, S2M-4261 and S2M-4262 on the membership of committees; motion S2M-4258 on substitution on committees; and motion S2M-4254 on rule 2.7.2.
Motions moved,
That the Parliament agrees that Bruce Crawford be appointed to the European and External Relations Committee.
That the Parliament agrees that Ms Maureen Watt be appointed to replace Bruce Crawford on the Local Government and Transport Committee.
That the Parliament agrees that Euan Robson be appointed to replace Mike Rumbles on the Health Committee.
That the Parliament agrees that Mr Dave Petrie be appointed to the Communities Committee.
That the Parliament agrees that Ms Maureen Watt be appointed to replace Stewart Stevenson as the Scottish National Party substitute on the Subordinate Legislation Committee.
That the Parliament agrees under Rule 2.7.2 that the Parliament shall meet in Committee Rooms 2 and 6 of the Parliament at Holyrood as recommended by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body until 12 May 2006.—[Ms Margaret Curran.]
I wish briefly to speak against motion S2M-4254, on the ground that the existing arrangements for the meetings of the Parliament in this room and the room next door are hopelessly inadequate. This room can accommodate at a squeeze only about two thirds of all members, and it is difficult or impossible to follow or participate in a debate from next door. The situation will be exacerbated during stage 3 proceedings on the Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament Bill next Wednesday.
On 16 March, I raised a point of order seeking an assurance that the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body would consider other options, including the Church of Scotland Assembly Hall, the old Royal High school building, the former Scottish Parliament building on Parliament Square and Holyrood Palace. I was given an assurance that all those options were being considered, but I have heard nothing back from the corporate body. On 13 March, I lodged a parliamentary question asking the corporate body to investigate the possibility of using Holyrood Palace, but I still await a reply more than five weeks later.
Yesterday, I visited the former Scottish Parliament building on Parliament Square. The prestigious Parliament Hall, which is easily large enough to accommodate 129 members, lay virtually empty, apart from the occasional member of the Faculty of Advocates strutting around speaking into a mobile phone.
Today, representatives of the Scottish Rugby Union visited the Parliament with the Calcutta cup. Our sporting heroes had to squeeze into rooms TG.20 and TG.21 because no committee room was available, due to the fact that this room and the room next door are being used for meetings of the Parliament.
The corporate body's failure to respond to my question leads me to think that it is not thoroughly investigating other options. Agreeing to motion S2M-4254 will mean that the Parliament will continue to sit in this room for at least another three weeks. That is an unacceptable situation, which is in danger of bringing our Parliament into disrepute, therefore I ask members to reject the motion.
I have agreed with the Minister for Parliamentary Business that I should respond briefly.
A full options paper indicating costs and alternative locations was presented both to the corporate body and to the Parliamentary Bureau, on which Mr Canavan is represented. The bureau and the corporate body agreed unanimously, as did the Parliament, to meet in committee rooms 2 and 6 this week. Now that we have fuller reports on the situation of the chamber, we are absolutely confident of being back in the chamber by mid-May, and perhaps even a little sooner. That is the background to the motion.
Members can decide on the matter at decision time, to which we now come.