On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am aware that, under rule 13.1 of the standing orders, it is permissible for members to make personal statements, conditional on your agreement and, of course, subject to scheduling by the Parliamentary Bureau. So, in the interests of checking that parliamentary procedures are followed correctly, I ask whether you would grant Douglas Ross a personal statement, if he asked you for one, to allow him to correct the record and to explain why he pursued a misleading line of questioning in last week’s session of First Minister’s questions.
We know that the Conservatives will oppose virtually any measure addressing climate change but, last Thursday, while questioning the First Minister, Douglas Ross attempted to discredit the new low-emission zone in Glasgow. He stated:
“Homeless Project Scotland was refused an exemption to use a refrigerated van within the restricted area.”—[Official Report, 1 June 2023; c 11.]
He went on to heavily imply that the LEZ was condemning the charity to being unable to do the work that it wants to do. Of course, he failed to clarify that Glasgow City Council had, in fact, given an exemption to Homeless Project Scotland so that it could continue its work. [Interruption.]
Members.
Additionally, after the end of First Minister’s questions, Douglas Ross proceeded to share his misleading assertion further on social media and, to date, has not removed that post.
That disingenuous conduct—[Interruption.]
Members.
—allied to the evident and appalling toxicity within the Tory group, which was exemplified yesterday by the disgraceful language of Murdo Fraser, who attacked through personal abuse a member of the Parliament, is, in my view—[Interruption.]
I ask members to ensure that we can all hear one another. Even if we do not all share the same view, I am sure that all members agree that we should be able to speak without being shouted down.
That behaviour is, in my view, by design tarnishing the reputation of this Parliament. It has even been reported today that Stephen Kerr wants to leave this Parliament to go back to the gentler environment of Westminster. [Interruption.]
Members.
Presiding Officer, I seek your advice about how we can ensure that Opposition leaders such as Douglas Ross do not knowingly mislead this chamber. Can you inform Parliament whether Douglas Ross has made any attempt to correct the record or seek your permission to make a statement so that he can explain why he thought that it was acceptable to pursue a misleading line of questioning during First Minister’s questions?
It is, of course, a matter for any member to make a request regarding a personal statement. No such request has been made, but I will, of course, consider any request that a member wishes to make.
The Presiding Officer who is in the chair at any point in time will determine whether, in all circumstances, it is their view that the requirement for courtesy and respect is being met, and they will decide whether to intervene as they feel necessary.
Of course, members themselves are responsible for the content of their contributions. All members can challenge contributions as a normal part of debate, and there are other mechanisms available, too.
We expect that debate will, at times, be robust. We wish it to be as free flowing as possible but will intervene as necessary. However, of course, members have an obligation to carry and conduct themselves in the chamber with courtesy and respect.
I am aware that the Presiding Officer who was in the chair yesterday at the time that has been referred to has had discussions with the members who were involved.
Of course, the integrity and the reputation of the Parliament are of the utmost importance to each and every one of us in the chamber.
I suspend the meeting briefly to allow the chamber and public gallery to clear.
12:53 Meeting suspended.