Plenary, 05 Nov 2003

Meeting date: Wednesday, November 5, 2003

Official Report 441KB pdf

---

Points of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer, I ask for your guidance on whether there has been a breach of the ministerial code by the Deputy Minister for Finance and Public Services, Tavish Scott, and whether any Executive minister has intimated that they want to make a statement to Parliament on the issue.

In the past 24 hours, Mr Scott has been quoted as saying that the common fisheries policy demonstrably does not work, and has expressed the desire to get rid of it, saying that it has failed and that it must go. That is in direct contrast to a statement made in the chamber by the First Minister on 29 May, which we take to be Executive policy. He said:

"we need to have a common fisheries policy in Europe so that we have a common approach".

What is the point of order Mr Brocklebank?

I am going on to the point of order. The First Minister also said that

"fish can move from one set of coastal waters into another"—[Official Report, 29 May 2003; c 251.]

much in the same way as does Liberal Democrat policy, it would seem. However, we know that the people whom I have mentioned have form on collective Cabinet responsibility.

The point of order is whether the Executive has changed its policy on fishing matters. It seems to me that there is evidence that Mr Scott has breached the ministerial code that says that once a decision has been announced, as it was on 29 May, all ministers are required to abide by it and defend it. Can you confirm who is responsible for determining whether the ministerial code has been breached and whether the minister has been asked to make a statement to the Parliament?

Mr Brocklebank, as you are a relatively new member I should explain that that is not a point of order. What ministers say is not a matter for the chair. There are plenty of other ways for you to address such questions directly to those who are responsible, that is, to the First Minister. If that is what you want to do, I encourage you so to do.

On a point of order.

Is it a point of order?

It is two points of order, of which notice was given to your office earlier this afternoon. In The Daily Telegraph today there is a story that the contractors that are responsible for building the new Scottish Parliament have demanded payment in return for appearing before Lord Fraser during his inquiry. Can you indicate—

What is the point of order?

Can you indicate whether there is any truth in that story, indicate which contractors have sought payment, and confirm that it would be outrageous for anyone to seek payment for participating in the inquiry? Is it not a matter of civic duty that all witnesses should participate? Can you confirm that there is no provision in the budget—for which we have responsibility—for any such payment to be made, and nor is there any provision under the contract that the contractors have with the Scottish Parliament that they can invoke to seek any payment or compensation?

Mr Ewing, unlike Mr Brocklebank you have been here for a significant period of time. Matters of civic duty are not points of order for the chair of this Parliament.

I say to members that I am not going to have the first five or six minutes of every Wednesday in this chamber taken up with spurious points of order that are, in fact, political points.

As for remedy, Mr Ewing, you are well aware that you can write to me and that I will respond timeously, or you can address such matters through a question to the Presiding Officer, and again I will answer at the earliest possible opportunity.

Let us get on, but let me be clear—

Let me be clear that I will not have five minutes taken up at the start with political points on the floor of this chamber. That cuts members' time for debate. Is it a point of order, Mr Sheridan?

I apologise, Presiding Officer, but it is a matter of urgency that will not come up every Wednesday, because every Wednesday is not 5 November, and the fire services are not demanded more at any other time of year than they are now. Has any approach been made to you, or have you made any approach, regarding an emergency statement on the reneging of the employers in relation to the fire services dispute? It is a very serious matter. Will a statement be made to this Parliament?

No approach has been made to me.