Chamber and committees

Will the member take an intervention?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes.

I hear that Mr Kerr thinks that that is embarrassing. He is a great proponent of the Parliament having responsibility for considering such matters, but he wants to deny Parliament the opportunity to consider the matter today.

I will speak to the timescale to which we have had to operate. This is about a private member’s bill at Westminster. As such, this Parliament’s standing orders make it clear that a legislative consent memorandum can be lodged only when a bill has completed the first amending stage, which was the committee stage in the House of Commons on 14 May. The Scottish Government sought to lodge the memorandum as quickly as possible, and it did so on 3 June. The reason for that was precisely what I have just laid out—there had to be a process of engagement to clarify certain areas so that the Government was satisfied in saying to the Parliament that we think that legislative consent should be granted. Should we not have complied with that responsibility? Should we just have breenged in, having not even looked at the matter, and brought it to Parliament without considering it? I do not think that Opposition members would expect us to do that.

I urge Parliament to vote for the motion.

I recognise any member’s right to speak against any motion that has been presented before the Parliament, and I recognise any member’s right to vote against a legislative consent motion or against the varying or suspension of standing orders. I recognise the right of any committee to determine not to report on a legislative consent memorandum, but I highlight—this speaks to the point that has just been made by the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee’s convener—the role of this Parliament.

I am concerned that, if we did not agree to the motion to suspend standing orders, we would be denying the Parliament the collective opportunity to consider whether to grant legislative consent to the UK Parliament. I do not think that we should deny it that opportunity. Let me be clear that the effect of not suspending standing orders in this instance would be to deny Parliament that opportunity, and it is almost inevitable that the UK Parliament would continue to press ahead with the legislation without our even having had the opportunity to say whether we grant consent.

I have heard the convener very clearly, but I do not know whether he was listening to me.

The fundamental point is that, in opposing the motion, he is seeking to deny the Parliament the opportunity to even consider whether we should grant legislative consent. I am not clear whether the convener realises that that is what he is doing, but that is what he is seeking to do.

I understand, and it is regrettable, that the committee feels that it has not had the time to fully consider the issue. I respectfully say that the matter is not entirely in the gift of the Scottish Government—the bill is being considered by the UK Parliament. The UK Parliament determines its own timescale; that is not determined by the Scottish Government.

I just rise to point out that I do not think that it is just me who has that perspective. [Applause.]

I thank Martin Whitfield for giving me the opportunity to speak a little more—I will not speak for long—about the legislative consent motion. I should say that it was the Government's preference for there to be a section 30 order to transfer responsibility to this Parliament to legislate on the matter. That was the approach that I and the Government would have preferred but, unfortunately, the UK Government would not agree, which is regrettable.

I am genuinely grateful to Tracy Gilbert MP for taking the bill forward. It is important that we make it as straightforward as possible for voters in Scotland to be able to apply for a postal or proxy vote. This bill, should it pass through the UK Parliament, will achieve that.

I thank Martin Whitfield and the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee for the report that has been laid before the Parliament. I am sure that everyone has read it as assiduously as I have. The committee has considered the matter at pace. I am grateful for that.

Mr Whitfield made the point that, this morning, the Government received a copy of a letter from the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, which asked a couple of questions. As Mr Whitfield mentioned, I responded to that letter today. I would have been very happy to go to the committee to speak to the matter, but it wrote to me and I responded today.

I will place on record some of the points that were raised by the committee, and how I responded. First, the committee asked how it will be decided which Government will exercise the delegated powers that are set out in the bill. I say to the Parliament that the Scottish Government intends to make the regulations under the power in the bill. Those will be subject to agreement by the UK Government, but they will be laid in the Scottish Parliament in the usual way.

The committee also asked how scrutiny by the Scottish Parliament of the policy position of those regulations will be ensured when the power is exercised by a minister of the Crown. The Scottish Government intends to exercise those powers to implement online applications for absent voting in devolved Scottish elections, and we would expect any future changes by a minister to be the subject of engagement and agreement. The Scottish ministers would seek to ensure that the Scottish Parliament had the opportunity to assess any changes in good time. We recognise the importance of parliamentary scrutiny, and we will make sure that that is possible in this case.

With that, I urge the Parliament to agree to the motion in my name.

I was entirely relaxed, but I will move the motion again.

Motion moved,

That, under Rule 9.8.5A, the time limit be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[Jamie Hepburn]

Motion agreed to.

Amendment 258 moved—[Stephen Kerr].

I recognise the importance of doing that and, as far as we can, we will always do that.

On the point that the Senedd may have granted consent, I respectfully say that that is because it is considering the legislation in the Welsh context. We must consider its practical application in the Scottish context. [Interruption.] I hear members laughing, but the fundamental responsibility of the Scottish Government, in the first instance, is to give the Parliament the opportunity to consider the matter in the Scottish context.

On a point of order, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am afraid that I cannot tell whether my vote has gone through, but I would have voted no.