Chamber and committees

Yes.

You are asking about civil sanctions.

Precisely. I think that the direction of travel is the appropriate one. There is a question whether the bill could go further, but I think that it is moving in the right direction, if I can put it that way.

In terms of monitoring, if we are talking about local government elections, there have not been any held since then. I have already made the point around by-elections, and we have had a clear interaction with those who are elected to see whether any of them fell foul of the legislative provisions that we put in place. The answer was no. Interacting with those who have responsibility will be an ongoing process.

I am here to talk about the bill, but I am happy to write to the committee with any wider information that it might like.

It is marginal. I observe that by-elections in a local government context can arise from any number of circumstances. We are all involved in the political process and will all be aware of people who have stood for local government and then seen their life circumstances change for any given number of reasons. They might have a new job and be unable to accommodate the requirements of being a councillor, which necessitates a by-election.

We are up front about the possibility of by-elections, but I suggest that the likelihood of them being caused by this change is marginal and consistent with the possibility that, at any stage across the local government wards that we have in Scotland, there could end up being by-elections.

Thank you for inviting me to give evidence on the bill. As the committee is aware, the bill is very short, so I will keep my opening remarks similarly brief.

The bill only makes one small change to elections law in contrast to the package of statutory instruments that you considered last week, which made multiple changes. This single-issue bill fixes an inadvertent gap in existing legislation. In December 2024, the Scottish Parliament voted unanimously to approve the Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Bill at stage 3. That bill included a provision that had intended to extend candidacy rights in the Scottish Parliament and local government elections to all foreign nationals with limited leave to remain. That was the logical extension of the expanded franchise for our elections, which, since 2020, has given a vote to people from all nations who have chosen to make their life in Scotland.

It has since become apparent that there is a gap in the legislation. Regrettably, an error means that Commonwealth citizens with limited leave to remain do not have the right to stand as candidates at local government elections in Scotland. I stress that there is no similar gap for members of this Parliament, because the oversight in the legislation applies only to local government elections and only to Commonwealth citizens with limited leave to remain.

In practice, that means that, as the law stands, a US citizen with limited leave to remain is able to stand for election as a local councillor but a citizen of Canada with limited leave to remain cannot. That is not what the Government intended, and it is also clear that, in passing the bill into law in the previous parliamentary session, it was not the Parliament’s intention either. That situation cannot remain. This new bill will mean that Commonwealth citizens with limited leave to remain will be able to stand in next May’s council elections, should the Parliament choose to pass it.

I take this opportunity to express my regret for the mistake. It is unfortunate that the bill is necessary, but I hope that the committee appreciates that the Government acted promptly after first identifying the issue in May during the preparation of the local government Scottish statutory instruments that I spoke with the committee about and which the committee agreed to last week. It is important that, when mistakes are identified, the Government is transparent about them and takes steps to fix the issue, as we have done in this case.

It is important that the law is clear and consistent, which is why I have introduced this legislation ahead of next May’s local government elections. I encourage committee members to support the bill, given that it will bring the law into line with the will of the Parliament, as it was expressed in late 2024. My colleagues and I are happy to answer any questions that the committee might have.

10:15

It is agreed that councillor is a part-time role and is remunerated on that basis. There is a wider question to consider about that situation, but people have to balance full-time employment with being a councillor in many instances. That is ultimately for the individual who is elected.

No, they would have to cease holding office, which is in line with their eligibility to stand as a candidate in the first place. However, there are any number of reasons why a person might become ineligible and cease to hold office. The 2025 act that we passed went further and broadened the grounds for ineligibility around requirements for people who have committed a sexual offence, for example, who would not previously have become immediately ineligible for elected office at a local government level but would now, because we took that step.

There are multiple reasons why a person might end up being ineligible. Bankruptcy is another long-standing reason, so this change will add to that list.

I do not think that this change in itself heightens that risk. I do not mean this in a supercilious fashion but, to be candid, if you are a hostile state actor, you are rather less likely to seek to stand as a candidate for Clackmannanshire Council than do something by other nefarious means. We have already seen incidents of hostile state actors seeking to interfere in our election process. I will not say too much about that because there is a live case, but, as far as I am aware, those who are alleged to have been involved are not foreign nationals.

Yes, foreign interference in our domestic political system is a challenge, and we are not unique in that regard. All western democracies are susceptible to that challenge. I do not think that extending eligibility to Commonwealth citizens with limited leave to remain is likely to increase the likelihood of hostile state action. I remind people that this change is about enabling Commonwealth citizens with limited leave to remain to stand for local government elections.