Plenary, 23 Sep 2009

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Official Report 349KB pdf

---

Points of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. On 3 September, the First Minister unveiled the Government's programme to the chamber. Despite being asked by me about legislation on class sizes, none was announced. Last week, at First Minister's question time, I again raised the issue of the lack of legislation to secure the Scottish National Party's pledge of class sizes of 18 in primary 1 to primary 3. Again, there was no response on that important flagship policy.

Today, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning announced that there will be legislation that will limit only P1 classes to a maximum of 25, not 18. That is clearly a U-turn on the policy of class sizes of 18, which is of interest to every member in the chamber and on which, I believe, a statement should have been made to the chamber. Will you reflect on whether it was reasonable for the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning to make what was a very important announcement in that way? Will the Parliamentary Bureau look at whether time can be found for a debate on the matter as soon as possible?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

I will answer Margaret Smith's point of order first, if I may.

I am grateful to Margaret Smith for prior notice of her point of order, which I have already reflected on. As members will recall, this is not the first occasion on which such a point of order has been raised. I am disappointed that the announcement appeared in the media this morning prior to members being informed by an answer to an inspired parliamentary question. I remind the Government that major policy announcements should not enter the public domain before being communicated to Parliament.

I will now take Mr Gibson's point of order.

Presiding Officer, the matter does not involve primary legislation. Will you reflect on that when you consider the way in which the cabinet secretary made the announcement? The Scottish statutory instrument in question is no different from the hundreds of other SSIs that have been made each year over the past decade, not just in relation to education but in relation to local government, health, transport and every other devolved area. For example, in 2006—when Margaret Smith's party was part of the ruling Labour-Liberal Administration—some 616 such SSIs were made, including: the Teachers' Superannuation (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/308); the Education (Student Loans) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/316); the Education (Assisted Places) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2006 (SSI 2006/317); and so on. The SSI in today's announcement is no different from those.

I am not entirely convinced that that was a point of order. It is for me to decide whether I believe the matter was a major policy announcement. I believe that it was and that the announcement should have been made to Parliament first.