Plenary, 31 Jan 2002

Meeting date: Thursday, January 31, 2002

Official Report 638KB pdf

---

Business Motion

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S1M-2658, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme. Any members who wish to speak against the motion should press their request-to-speak button now.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees the following programme of business—

Wednesday 6 February 2002

2.30 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 3 Debate on the Community Care and Health (Scotland) Bill

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business – debate on the subject of S1M-2363 Stewart Stevenson: HM Prison Peterhead and Beacon Site Status

Thursday 7 February 2002

9.30 am Scottish National Party Business

followed by Business Motion

2.30 pm Question Time

3.10 pm First Minister's Question Time

3.30 pm Stage 1 Debate on the Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Scotland) Bill

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business - debate on the subject of S1M-2533 Mr Donald Gorrie: Musical Instrument Instructors

Wednesday 13 February 2002

1.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 3 Debate on the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

7.00 pm Decision Time

Thursday 14 February 2002

9.30 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Stage 3 Debate on the Water Industry (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motion

2.30 pm Question Time

3.10 pm First Minister's Question Time

3.30 pm Continuation of Stage 3 Debate on the Water Industry (Scotland) Bill

followed by Stage 3 Debate on the Budget (Scotland) (No.3) Bill

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members' Business—[Euan Robson.]

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The business motion states that next Thursday we will debate an item of SNP business, but the motion does not give any indication as to what that debate will be on. Is not it discourteous to the chamber that the SNP has not yet informed the Parliament what it intends the Parliament to debate next week? As a matter of courtesy, should not that be included as part of the business motion that has been moved today? Perhaps the SNP has no priorities and does not know what it wants to debate until it is told by the Sunday newspaper editorials.

That is not a point of order. I am not aware that this week's practice is different from the practice of previous weeks. I have no doubt that the persons to whom the point is directed will consider what, if any, attention they wish to pay to it.

I have notice of one member wishing to speak against the motion. I call Alex Johnstone.

It is not my intention to force a vote on today's business motion, but I wish to take the opportunity to bring one matter to the attention of Parliament before we proceed to decide on the motion.

The stage 3 debate on the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill has been scheduled for 13 February. I thank the Minister for Parliamentary Business for ensuring that a suitable amount of time—some six hours—is available to debate the issues involved. However, I want to take the opportunity to express my concerns, which follow directly from those that Mike Rumbles expressed in the previous debate.

It would be irresponsible to suggest that enormous change is likely to happen at stage 3—I believe that only one amendment to standing orders has been lodged so far. However, the changes that we are likely to approve at today's decision time will mean that further significant last-minute changes can be expected during the debate on the amendments to that bill. Indeed, if we think about the experience of stage 2, it is obvious that the bill at stage 3 is already radically different from the bill that was debated at stage 1. For those of us who were combatants in the stage 1 and stage 2 processes, it is only reasonable to assume that attempts will yet again be made radically to change the bill at stage 3. For that reason, I am concerned that we shall move directly from the debate on the amendments to the debate on the motion that the bill be passed.

I believe that, when we participate in the debate on the motion that the bill be passed, many of us will not be clear about the nature of the bill that is being debated. I therefore believe—

Will the member give way?

I am almost finished.

It would be worth while to programme some space between the debates on those two issues.

The Parliamentary Bureau has provided what is expected to be adequate time. We do not as yet know how many amendments will be lodged, but the time that is available is clearly sufficient to cope with the large number of amendments that is anticipated. If only a few amendments are lodged, there might be an opportunity to revisit the situation.

Alex Johnstone made the point that, if a large number of amendments are agreed to, members might be unsure of what effect those will have on the bill at the end of stage 3. It is up to the members who lodge the amendments to be sure that they understand the consequences not only of their amendments but of the way in which the amendments impact one upon the other.

Given the fact that, since the Rural Development Committee completed stage 2, members have had two months' notice of how the bill as amended at stage 2 stands, will the minister take the opportunity—as I tried to do in the previous debate—to urge members who want to lodge amendments to do so as soon as possible? In that way, all members would have the benefit of seeing those amendments and we would know where we are going.

Clearly, it is helpful if members lodge amendments early, as other members can then consider in detail the implications of the amendments. However, that is a matter for members, not for the Bureau or the Executive. I cannot add any more.

Motion agreed to.

Meeting suspended until 14:30.

On resuming—