The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 3940 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
I think that I would get some points. I would not get a community sentence or a prison sentence—
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
No, I shall not be giving way to Mr Mason.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
Yes, I will give way to Jeremy Balfour.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
Yes, I will give way to Ms Slater.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
I believe that the law is the law, Ms Slater. Perhaps my black-and-white nature is a little bit uncomfortable for those on the Green benches. I believe that, regardless of the severity of the crime, any MSP who is convicted of an offence should be removed automatically.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
Thank you, Mr Hoy. As MSPs, we have very challenging and complex diaries to manage and we cannot be in every single proceeding in every single committee. That is the whole point of having parliamentary and party groups—[Interruption.] Are members okay with that?
I recognise that non-attendance has clearly garnered some concern among members, but I raise the fact that such a provision already exists at local government level, and there have been a number of instances in which disgraced members have been able to continue to draw a salary without doing any work for the constituents who elected them. I invite members to work with me to find a solution that would bring non-attendance back into the bill.
I move amendment 64.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
I press amendment 67.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
The bill began life as a Scottish Conservative pledge. We proposed a Mackay’s law as long ago as 2021. The intention was to give people the ability to remove an absentee MSP: an elected representative who, without legitimate reason, simply withdrew from Parliament and ceased to do their job. There was a clear requirement for such a bill. Derek Mackay, the former finance secretary, did not attend Parliament or engage with it in any way after he was forced to resign in disgrace, yet he was paid about £100,000 during that period. Public anger and common sense demanded a Mackay’s law. The bill will not be that law, but that law is still very much required.
Our original proposal was to recall MSPs for non-attendance, either in person or remotely, that exceeded 180 days, with appropriate exemptions and safeguards. However, that simple provision is not part of the bill. The bill does not contain what we pledged and it is not Mackay’s law. It is not what this Parliament badly needs. I am bitterly disappointed that my amendments at stage 3 were not agreed to this afternoon. They would have left us with a still imperfect yet workable bill.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I sought to deliver what the public expected of me—what was in the Scottish Conservatives’ manifesto. The bill is not that.
As things stand, we risk creating an inconsistent act that would do little to restore public faith in this Parliament, which I believe is badly eroding every day. It is not satisfactory that an MSP could be sentenced to anything up to a year in prison, yet not face removal by any means. The bill would allow an MSP who was in prison for an extremely serious offence to continue picking up a large salary at the taxpayer’s expense. I hardly need to add that the problem is being made worse by the SNP’s soft-touch justice system.
At the same time, an MSP who was suspended by this Parliament for 10 days would be subject to the recall mechanism with no appeal. That clear disparity is uncomfortable for members on the Conservative benches. It is deeply regrettable that my amendments that would have allowed the removal of any MSP who was found guilty by the courts and given either a custodial sentence or a community sentence were also rejected.
SNP and Green members have found very different difficulties with the bill and I understand that, ultimately, their votes will kill it. To be clear, Presiding Officer, I note that our problem with the bill is that it is not tough enough. It would fail to achieve what the public expect and what this Parliament needs. It would fail to turf out the likes of Derek Mackay.
For those reasons, with a good deal of regret, my party is unable to support the bill and we will abstain in the vote this evening. The Scottish Parliament (Recall of Members) Bill is a missed opportunity. However, we in the Scottish Conservatives have long campaigned for a better system of sanctions that will meet public expectations and enhance the standing of this Parliament, and we will continue to do so.
17:45
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
Sue Webber
I am content that the minister drew attention to the fact that there would have to be a custodial sentence or a community sentence that was given following a guilty verdict. I say to Mr Cole-Hamilton that it is not just about someone being found guilty. However, Mr Cole-Hamilton was correct to state that the law is often an ass. It certainly is if we consider some of the legislation that we have passed in this place.
I do not think that the public believe that it is okay for an MSP who has been found guilty to be in this place representing them.