Plenary,
Meeting date: Thursday, May 28, 2009
Official Report
675KB pdf
Point of Order
On a point of order, Presiding Officer.
Will you advise me on the obligations on ministers to provide full information when they respond to questions in the chamber? Earlier today, as you will recall, the First Minister and I had a robust exchange on absconds from the open prison estate. I find it hard to believe that he was not aware at that point that a life prisoner had failed to return to Castle Huntly yesterday. The prisoner had absconded; a fact that the First Minister did not see fit to mention in passing. That seems a clear failure to observe the obligation on ministers to provide comprehensive answers. At the very least, I expect Mr MacAskill to make a statement—very shortly—to explain how this has come about.
As Mr Gray is aware, it is not for me to rule on the veracity of ministerial answers. If any member wishes to come to the chamber in light of what has been said, they are entirely free to do so.
Further to the point of order, Presiding Officer.
As you will be aware, under questioning from Mr Gray and Annabel Goldie at First Minister's question time today, the First Minister dealt with the issue of abscondees. We now have a situation where another convicted murderer has gone absent without leave from Castle Huntly prison. In the circumstances, is it appropriate for you to give the First Minister the opportunity to make a statement—now, in the chamber—on the circumstances of the abscond or will you direct him along the lines of making a full written statement when he has the opportunity to do so at the conclusion of this meeting?
As the member knows, matters for business in the chamber are decided by the Parliamentary Bureau. Any such request will be considered accordingly. I have no more to say on the matter.
The First Minister wishes to respond.
Further to the point of order, Presiding Officer.
The release of information on prisoners in this regard is an operational matter for Tayside Police. It would be extraordinary if any politician tried to change that. I could also mention that if this new criterion—of ministerial statements on abscondees—had been followed previously, we would have had 60 when the Labour Party was in office and 80 when the Tory party was in office.