Plenary, 26 Sep 2007

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Official Report 442KB pdf

---

Point of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Last Wednesday, the Local Government and Communities Committee discussed fuel poverty, and we questioned the Minister for Communities and Sport at length on that and other matters. The Official Report clearly shows that the convener asked the minister whether it was true that

"the free central heating programme might be means tested in future",

to which the minister replied,

"No, I am not suggesting that."

The minister said later that the review

"is about enhancing the programme to ensure that we do what I think we all want to do—tackle fuel poverty."—[Official Report, Local Government and Communities Committee, 19 September 2007; c 87-90.]

However, the following day, directly referring to that committee meeting, the temporary acting leader of the Opposition said in questions to the First Minister:

"the Scottish National Party Government is now reviewing the scheme, with targeting or means testing the likely outcome".

She asked

"Why is the Minister for Communities and Sport now proposing to cut that lifeline?"—[Official Report, 20 September 2007; c 1970-71.]

Is it appropriate for the leader of the Opposition to mislead Parliament in such an obvious way, and to refer to a committee meeting when the Official Report has not been published, so that members cannot see whether the minister said what he is alleged to have said?

Points of order are about procedures in the chamber, so Mr Gibson's lengthy peroration does not constitute a point of order.

On a further point of order Presiding Officer. I seek clarification on the matter. We thought that the appropriate way to raise the possibility that Wendy Alexander misled Parliament last week would be to raise it in committee because we believe that it was the committee's view on fuel poverty and the central heating programme that was misrepresented. That was done this morning and the committee convener, Duncan McNeil, recommended that we raise the issue as a point of order in the chamber this afternoon. I therefore seek clarification. If we believe that a member has misled Parliament, what is our next port of call?

I am not responsible for what committee conveners advise members to do. Frankly, if someone is accused of misleading the chamber, it is up to them to reflect on that and to come back to the chamber. In saying that, I am not asking Ms Alexander to do so.