Chamber and committees

Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, December 20, 2022

Official Report 1978KB pdf

Business Motion

The Presiding Officer (Alison Johnstone)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S3M-07320, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to this week’s business. I invite George Adam to move the motion.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees to the following revisions to the programme of business for—

(a) Tuesday 20 December 2022—

delete

8.00 pm Decision Time

and insert

10.20 pm Decision Time

(b) Wednesday 21 December 2022—

delete

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions:
Rural Affairs and Islands;
Health and Social Care;
Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

followed by Ministerial Statement: Climate Change Committee’s Review of Scottish Emissions Targets and Progress Report 2022

and insert

2.00 pm Stage 3 Proceedings: Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

3.15 pm Portfolio Questions:
Rural Affairs and Islands;
Health and Social Care;
Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

delete

5.45 pm Decision Time

and insert

6.30 pm Decision Time

after

12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions

insert

followed by Ministerial Statement: Climate Change Committee’s Review of Scottish Emissions Targets and Progress Report 2022

delete

12.45 pm Decision Time

and insert

1.15 pm Decision Time—[George Adam.]

The Presiding Officer

I call Alexander Burnett to speak to and move amendment S6M-07320.1.

14:21

Alexander Burnett (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)

Here we are, then. After months of warnings from me and my party, which were largely ignored, we now face a vote on a motion that goes to extraordinary lengths to keep the final vote on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill before Christmas. This is the culmination of the many bureau meetings at which I voiced my concerns and the minister, in turn, voiced excuse after excuse as to why the bill should be rushed, all to avoid some bad public relations for the Cabinet.

I confess that, despite all the timetabling motions and the underhanded moves from the convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, who, of course, is a Scottish National Party MSP, I never actually thought that we would reach a point at which the choice before members was so blatant. Members can support the motion and, in doing so, directly support the SNP’s gleeful push to deny Parliament the scrutiny that it was elected to provide, or they can take the correct path and support my amendment to give the bill adequate time to be considered properly.

In the previous session, the SNP would not have been able to get away with it, but now, with the Greens mindlessly nodding through every cynical political decision, it has shut down scrutiny on any legislation that is considered remotely controversial: the Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles (Scotland) Bill, the coronavirus bills or the rent freeze bill, to name a few. That has now become the norm and, sadly, this Parliament, its MSPs and its officials, appear to have accepted that. What a joke.

A future version of Parliament will have to spend a full session going back and repairing or repealing the rushed legislation passed during this sorry stint of government. We should all be thoroughly ashamed of the example that we are setting for the rest of the world of how not to do democracy.

The situation is made even worse when we consider the kangaroo court that took place on Monday, when the SNP finally allowed evidence to be taken from a United Nations expert on violence against women and girls but stacked the evidence session in its favour by re-inviting a Government-backing witness, too. That witness had already given evidence, and I note that organisations and former MSPs have written to complain about being excluded from the process—

The Presiding Officer

Mr Burnett, I will stop you for a second and ask you to take a seat. I advise in the strongest possible terms that there is a code of conduct, to which all MSPs are expected to adhere. We must treat all other MSPs with courtesy and respect, and I object to language that suggests otherwise. The proceedings that took place on Monday evening were parliamentary proceedings, and I ask you to continue, bearing that in mind.

Alexander Burnett

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I should just point out that a lot of members have not had the opportunity to study the Official Report of that committee meeting. I am not sure whether it has even been published yet, but there certainly has not been time for members who did not attend that committee meeting to have considered the evidence that was taken.

We should be doing the sensible and mind-numbingly obvious thing by pausing the bill in order to let the committee examine it further, and scheduling more than two days for consideration of the stage 3 amendments, even if that means that we delay the final vote until 2023.

I have said it before and I will say it again: there is no good reason why the bill process could not be finished in the new year. Sadly, though, the arbitrary completion deadline of Christmas appears to have been accepted by everyone else. Other members of the Parliamentary Bureau have supported the SNP’s timetable multiple times. Labour voted against our sensible amendments that would have given more time to stage 2, which might have meant that some of stage 3’s 153 amendments would have been dealt with already.

This Parliament’s reputation is in free fall, and we are fast approaching rock bottom. I truly believe that schools and universities will use this parliamentary session as a case study of what happens when an Executive is allowed to go unchecked—unchecked by politicians, officials and everyone.

However, we can fix that. First and foremost, there needs to be a serious recognition that the Scottish Government does not respect this place, which was all too clear with last week’s budget fiasco. Presiding Officer, the Government deliberately ignored you and it will do so again. It will push you and this Parliament as far as it can, until it is told not to, and it is time to tell it not to.

I move amendment S6M-07320.1, to insert after “3.15 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs and Islands; Health and Social Care; Social Justice, Housing and Local Government”:

I move amendment S6M-07320.1 to insert after “3.15 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs and Islands; Health and Social Care; Social Justice, Housing and Local Government”—

“delete

Stage 3 Debate: Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

and insert

Stage 3 Proceedings: Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill”.

Jeremy Balfour (Lothian) (Con)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance. As we have just heard, today’s business promises to go on late into the evening and, for some colleagues, especially those who have disabilities or caring duties, that is a long time to be required to be in one place. Some people require to take medication at certain times, some require extra time for comfort breaks and some have care responsibilities that we will be unable to attend to.

As a Parliament, we have committed ourselves to be more inclusive and to encourage more people to stand for election. Can you advise me whether a disability impact assessment been carried out on today’s timings? What advice do you have for those members who will struggle due to the extended sitting time? If no assessment has been carried out, could you please tell me why?

The Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Balfour for his point of order. I am responsible for standing orders, but the chair does not govern matters of health and safety in the Parliament. However, I note the member’s concerns, which are on the record.

Comfort breaks will be built into today’s proceedings. I confirm now that I intend for there to be a break of around 15 minutes at around 6 pm. As recommended by the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, there are options for members to participate from locations other than the chamber, as required and as agreed by the Parliament. The Parliamentary Bureau has discussed the scheduling of business and I reassure the member that some of the issues that he has raised were considered by business managers.

Neil Bibby (West Scotland) (Lab)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Mr Burnett spoke to an amendment to the business motion, but that amendment has not been circulated to me or other members by either Mr Burnett or the parliamentary business team, and I am concerned about that.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Bibby for his point of order and I appreciate the points that he makes. However, standing orders allow that any member can lodge an amendment to the business motion if they have sufficient support—that of 10 members—to speak to it. I appreciate what Mr Bibby is saying with regard to the wording of the amendment.

Neil Bibby

What is the amendment?

Anas Sarwar (Glasgow) (Lab)

What is the amendment?

The Presiding Officer

Mr Burnett, can you advise the Parliament of the wording of your amendment?

Alexander Burnett

Well—

Martin Whitfield (South Scotland) (Lab)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The issue is that the amendment should be published. Members received a business update at 1.38, which I assume was later than when the amendment was lodged. I wonder why it was not published with that update, when the parliamentary manager’s motions were published.

The Presiding Officer

I understand that it was not lodged later than that. The amendments were lodged after that point.

I am going to suspend Parliament for the time being, in order to ensure that all members have the wording that they require.

14:30 Meeting suspended.

14:44 On resuming—

The Presiding Officer

I ask any member who has not yet received the notice of amendments to raise their hand.

Thank you, Ms Webber, we will ensure that it reaches you. We will do the same for Mercedes Villalba—thank you.

Meghan Gallacher (Central Scotland) (Con)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am concerned by the scheduling of business in this Parliament. As a new mum, I already struggle to find childcare during regular work hours, let alone until late at night. Last week’s business proposal said that we would be here until 11:30 tonight, so I made the best arrangement I possibly could. Today’s revision could mean that we will be here until late tonight and also tomorrow.

First, in line with my colleague Jeremy Balfour’s point of order, I ask whether any existing parliamentary processes include impact assessments of the effect of the scheduling of business on new parents. I ask that because, at the end of the previous session of Parliament, several members stood down citing the impossibility of working here while raising a young family. I fear that matters are becoming worse.

Secondly, is it your understanding that it would be possible within parliamentary processes for this week’s consideration of stage 3 amendments to have been split into three sessions, with the final debate on the Gender Recognition Reform Bill being moved into the first week of work in January, which currently has a blank business slot on Tuesday 10?

The Presiding Officer

I thank Ms Gallacher for her point of order. It is certainly the case that some of the matters the member raises are not matters for standing orders and therefore are not matters for me to rule on from the chair. As I said to Mr Balfour, breaks will be built into this afternoon. The cross-party Parliamentary Bureau is the forum that decides business for Parliament.

We have not yet reached the point of making a decision on the business timetable. That is what is currently being debated. We will continue in that vein.

Sue Webber (Lothian) (Con)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I have a spreadsheet on my computer with a waiting list of members of the public who are desperate to get into the gallery today. The gallery does not appear to be particularly full at the moment, given how many people are waiting to get into proceedings.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Ms Webber for her point of order, which is not a matter that I would usually rule on from the chair. I am aware that tickets have been allocated. Our colleagues from visitor services will be dealing with the matter at this moment.

Pauline McNeill (Glasgow) (Lab)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I wish to raise a point relating to the groupings of amendments. Please advise whether I should do that now or after this debate. I want to ensure that you know I will raise that point.

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, Ms McNeill. I suggest that we take that point of order when we reach that stage in the proceedings.

We will now carry on with the proceedings. I call Graham Simpson to speak to and move amendment S6M-07320.2.

14:49

Graham Simpson (Central Scotland) (Con)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I completely agree with everything that has been said by Mr Burnett, Mr Balfour and my other colleagues about today’s proceedings.

Colleagues have now had a chance to read my amendment to the business motion, which calls for a statement tomorrow on the strategic transport projects review 2. That was issued by the Scottish Government nearly two weeks ago, at the end of the week, but no parliamentary time has been allocated to it so far. There has been no debate and there have been no questions—nothing—yet this eagerly awaited document could have far-reaching consequences.

As a Parliament, we should expect to have statements on important matters such as this one as soon as the documents are issued. There is simply no good reason for the Government to avoid being questioned on STPR2—unless, of course, it does not fancy the undoubtedly tough grilling that it would get from me and others.

To say that STPR2 is a damp squib is a massive understatement. People who live in the south-west who were hoping to get some good news on the upgrading of the A75 and the A77 are still waiting. If people want to find out when the A9 will be fully dualled between Perth and Inverness, the document is not for them, I am afraid. We would think that it might have been.

There are lots of warm words, but they offer cold comfort for communities the length and breadth of Scotland. There is nothing in the STPR2 for people who rely on Scotland’s ageing ferry fleet. There are plenty of ifs, buts and maybes, but no firm commitments to build bridges and tunnels or improve ports. There is no ferry replacement plan. We must wait for that, I suppose.

There are the usual platitudes about wanting to cut car miles by a fifth within seven years, but just how that is going to be achieved is anyone’s guess. People will certainly not discover the answers from the document.

On railways, we have conflicting statements. I quote the document:

“The plan includes the following statement in relation to transport: ‘By 2032 ... we will have decarbonised our passenger railways’”.

However, it goes on to say that, by 2032,

“Scotland’s passenger rail services”

will be

“considerably decarbonised, with just a few years to go until they are fully decarbonised”.

That is not the same thing.

The point is that all of that gives MSPs much to chew over, but with no chance to question the minister. Instead, we have the farce of this week. We have been through that already, with a potential midnight sitting tonight and another late one tomorrow. We should be having statements on things such as STPR2 and dealing with important matters such as that, which affect all our constituents and all our constituencies.

I move amendment S6M-07320.2, to insert after “3.15 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs and Islands; Health and Social Care; Social Justice, Housing and Local Government”:

“followed by Ministerial Statement: Strategic Transport Projects Review 2”.

The Presiding Officer

I call Liam Kerr to speak to and move amendment S6M-07320.3.

14:53

Liam Kerr (North East Scotland) (Con)

I am very grateful, Presiding Officer. I rise to request that tomorrow’s business be adjusted to include a ministerial statement on the Government’s biodiversity strategy, which was laid in Parliament on 13 December 2022. For the benefit of those in the chamber, I note that that is the purpose of the amendment that I lodged.

The strategy is incredibly timely given that, just yesterday, at the 15th United Nations conference of the parties—the biodiversity summit—which many worry too often plays second fiddle to the climate conference COP, a deal was sealed on a new global biodiversity framework. Some have called it a Paris moment for nature. In it, nations have adopted four goals and 23 targets for 2030 to protect our lands, coasts and inland waters.

The loss of species and degradation of our natural environment is an existential threat to humanity that requires that we take urgent and transformative action. Indeed, Minister Lorna Slater states at the beginning of the biodiversity strategy:

“this is an emergency that requires an emergency response.”

Indeed it does, and that is why we must hear a ministerial statement without delay. I note that the strategy is already a week old. Waiting several weeks until after the recess fails to recognise the importance of the strategy.

It is important that the issue is put into context. Scottish Forestry created only 9,500 hectares of new woodland last year, against the Scottish Government’s target of 13,500 hectares for 2021-22. The Government’s “State of Nature Scotland” report states that species abundance has shown a marked and continual decline in the past 10 years. More generally, 49 per cent of species have decreased. A year ago, The Ferret reported that 531 habitats and 603 species in Scotland are in poor condition, including island and upland habitats. Species that are in poor condition and in decline include the Scottish wildcat, the hedgehog, the capercaillie and the Arctic skua. Just this morning, the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee heard from the Climate Change Committee about the importance of peatland restoration. However the Government’s target of 20,000 hectares per year was missed by well over 10,000 hectares.

In that context, the biodiversity strategy is key. The Climate Change Committee’s report and the evidence that it has given to committee indicate that data, monitoring and proper planning are imperative in order to achieve what we all want. Therefore, it is vital that ministers appear before the Parliament so that MSPs can interrogate the monitoring and evaluation framework that will be used to check that we are meeting our biodiversity targets, ensure that we see how stakeholder engagement will be carried out—engaging the public so that they buy into the biodiversity strategy is key to successful outcomes—and to see whether the priority actions that have been set out for 2030 are the most appropriate for achieving our biodiversity goals. Although I appreciate that the Parliament has a tight timescale before the Christmas recess, the biodiversity and nature crisis will not wait—and nor should we.

Respectfully, I ask the Parliament to grant my request for there to be a ministerial statement on the biodiversity strategy tomorrow.

I move amendment S6M-07320.3, to insert after “3.15 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs and Islands; Health and Social Care; Social Justice, Housing and Local Government”:

“followed by Ministerial Statement: Biodiversity Strategy”.

The Presiding Officer

I call Stephen Kerr to speak to and move amendment S6M-07320.4.

14:57

Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con)

Last week, a plethora of annual statistics was released about Scotland’s education system. I believe that those statistics ought to have been a focus of the business of the Parliament last week, because they could cause us to sit up and take notice. We should have had the opportunity to have heard from the cabinet secretary last week; however, we did not. I tried every way that I knew to get that issue into the Parliament’s Business Bulletin, but I was unsuccessful.

The minister has just partly answered a topical question about some of the evidence that was delivered through the statistical release—namely, that we have fewer teachers and more pupils and therefore greater class sizes. On top of that, as a consequence of the budget, councils are talking about having shorter lesson periods, shorter school days and shorter school weeks, and there is the question of the diminishing range of subject choices that are available to our young people who are in secondary schools. As I have already mentioned, class sizes are rising as pupil-teacher ratios are ditched—in part for financial expediency, but largely because of Scottish Government neglect. As has been mentioned, there is also grave concern among teachers about a number of issues, not least the level of classroom violence that they encounter. Teachers ought not to have to worry about their safety in the classroom.

If the Parliament is not focused on the quality of our children’s education and the clear issues that we are facing in the education system, especially in the aftermath of the pandemic, then all I can say is that we ought to be. That is why I want a ministerial statement to be added to chamber business tomorrow, so that the Government, represented by the cabinet secretary or the minister, can come to the Parliament and be scrutinised about the data that we are now in possession of: the decline in the number of teachers in our schools, as well as other data that has been released through the summary statistics for schools in Scotland 2022.

Sadly, the sum total of the data does not make for pretty reading. That might explain why the Scottish Government has been so reluctant to come to the chamber to make a statement. It might also explain why the Scottish Government has removed Scotland from international league tables for education. I am afraid that those league tables and the limited data available to us would undoubtedly show that the SNP has mismanaged our education system and that there is a need for greater scrutiny of this policy area—perhaps more than any other.

I worry that there is worse to come, because of the budget and the commentary in the media—of which there has been plenty—about the consequences that flow from it. There will be another round of real-terms cuts to local government, which will undoubtedly have an impact on the education system, which is a big ticket item for every local authority. There will also be an impact on extracurricular activities, which add so much to children’s experience at school.

Scottish education used to be the envy of the world. However, the limited data that is available to us shows us that there have been 15 years of mismanagement at the hands of the Scottish Government. Many of us in the Parliament believe that Scotland’s children and young people deserve better.

That is why it is imperative that the SNP Government makes a statement about the curriculum for excellence data. That should happen tomorrow, so that we can begin a more serious look at those statistics in the context of the work of the Parliament. Fundamentally, that is why the people of Scotland elect us.

I move amendment S6M-07320.4, to insert after “3.15 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs and Islands; Health and Social Care; Social Justice, Housing and Local Government”:

“followed by Ministerial Statement: Curriculum for Excellence Achievement Statistics”.

The Presiding Officer

I call George Adam to respond on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau.

15:02

The Minister for Parliamentary Business (George Adam)

On behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, I say to some colleagues that had they spoken to their business manager to put those points across, their business manager would have been able to argue those points at bureau, which is the place for such discussions to be held in an open and frank manner.

With that in mind, I stand by the business programme that we agreed earlier today at the bureau. I suggest that we carry on in that way.

Neil Bibby (West Scotland) (Lab)

I thank the minister for taking my intervention. He will be aware that we have called for several statements, including on the strategic transport projects review 2 and education attainment. I once again put on record our support for those statements being made and hope that the Government will make them early in the new year.

We have been clear that the debate on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill should not be curtailed. We ensured that the bill was delayed until this week and that the debate was originally scheduled to be held over two days. The final debate was doubled in length following our request. Meanwhile, the Conservatives say that they want extra time to debate the bill but are now wasting time when we should be scrutinising the bill. [Applause.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

Neil Bibby

As I said, we do not wish to curtail the debate on the bill and have never sought to do so, at any stage. On that issue, does the minister share my understanding that the Presiding Officer would normally allow every member who wishes to speak on a bill the opportunity to do so?

George Adam

I believe that the Presiding Officer mentioned during the meeting that she was of a mind to hear from as many members as possible in order to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to say their piece during the passage of the bill—as is normally the case.

On Mr Bibby’s question about statements, as a business manager, Mr Bibby was right to work through the Parliamentary Bureau, where we found our way to common ground to agree that the statements will be made at a later date. That is how we work in the Scottish Parliament.

Alexander Burnett

On a point of order, Presiding Officer, I seek your advice on how a member or a minister might correct the record. Both my position at the bureau and the very clearly documented email correspondence between us are contrary to the minister’s suggestion that we have not been seeking to approve the timetable for the bill.

Perhaps the Presiding Officer could remind the minister of how he might correct the record, because he has still failed to come to the chamber to do so. He misled previously when he said that the decision was unanimous. I am not sure whether the minutes of the bureau meeting have been published, but when they are, they will clearly show that the decision was not unanimous. I trust that the Presiding Officer will be able to instruct the minister accordingly.

The Presiding Officer

The content of members’ contributions is not ordinarily a matter for the chair. Members will be aware of the corrections mechanism and how to use it, should they wish to correct anything that is recorded in the Official Report.

The question is, that amendment S6M-07320.1, in the name of Alexander Burnett, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-07320, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to this week’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division. There will be a brief pause, to allow members to access the digital voting system.

15:05 Meeting suspended.

15:08 On resuming—

The Presiding Officer

The question is, that amendment S6M-07320.1, in the name of Alexander Burnett, be agreed to.

For

Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Cameron, Donald (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (Con)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con)
White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)

Against

Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab)
Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)
Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division on amendment S6M-07320.1, in the name of Alexander Burnett, is: For 31, Against 96, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

The Presiding Officer

The next question is, that amendment S6M-07320.2, in the name of Graham Simpson, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-07320, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to this week’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division.

For

Against

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division on amendment S6M-07320.2, in the name of Graham Simpson, is: For 31, Against 96, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

The Presiding Officer

The next question is, that amendment S6M-07320.3, in the name of Liam Kerr, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-07320, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to this week’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division.

For

Against

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division on amendment S6M-07320.3, in the name of Liam Kerr, is: For 31, Against 96, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

The Presiding Officer

The next question is, that amendment S6M-07320.4, in the name of Stephen Kerr, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-07320, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to this week’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division.

For

Against

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division on amendment S6M-07320.4, in the name of Stephen Kerr, is: For 31, Against 96, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

The Presiding Officer

The next question is, that motion S6M-07320, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to this week’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division.

For

Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab)
Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)
Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)

Against

Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con)
Cameron, Donald (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)

Abstentions

Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (Con)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con)
White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con)

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division is: For 95, Against 10, Abstentions 21.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees to the following revisions to the programme of business for—

(a) Tuesday 20 December 2022—

delete

8.00 pm Decision Time

and insert

10.20 pm Decision Time

(b) Wednesday 21 December 2022—

delete

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions:
Rural Affairs and Islands;
Health and Social Care;
Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

followed by Ministerial Statement: Climate Change Committee’s Review of Scottish Emissions Targets and Progress Report 2022

and insert

2.00 pm Stage 3 Proceedings: Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

3.15 pm Portfolio Questions:
Rural Affairs and Islands;
Health and Social Care;
Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

delete

5.45 pm Decision Time

and insert

6.30 pm Decision Time

after

12.00 pm First Minister's Questions

insert

followed by Ministerial Statement: Climate Change Committee’s Review of Scottish Emissions Targets and Progress Report 2022

delete

12.45 pm Decision Time

and insert

1.15 pm Decision Time

Alexander Burnett

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek a motion without notice under rule 8.6.2—

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr Burnett—I am just concluding this item of business.

Topical Question Time

Motion without Notice

Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, December 20, 2022

Contents

Business Motion