Official Report 953KB pdf
The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-14652, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on the timetable for consideration of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill. I invite Jamie Hepburn to move the motion.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees to consider the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill as follows—
Stage 1 on Thursday 10 October 2024, and subject to the Parliament’s agreement to the general principles of the Bill—
(a) that consideration of the Bill at stage 2 be completed by Tuesday 29 October 2024, and
(b) Stage 3 on Thursday 31 October 2024.—[Jamie Hepburn]
I call Graham Simpson to speak to and move amendment S6M-14652.1.
16:50
Moving an amendment to the business motion is not something that I do lightly, but I do so because I passionately believe in Parliament giving its members ample time to scrutinise legislation. We should all know that rushed legislation can be bad legislation.
First, let me say what the minister’s business motion seeks to do. It seeks to set a timetable for dealing with the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill. In trying to amend the business motion, I am interested only in that timetable; I am not interested in the bill itself, save to say that it is an important piece of legislation.
The minister wants us to have the following timetable. Stage 1 would be on Thursday 10 October. Should the bill pass that hurdle, stage 2 would be completed by Tuesday 29 October. Members will immediately realise that that takes in our two-week October recess. That is an issue that we should seek to avoid, but we can probably live with it.
With stage 2 having been completed by 29 October, the minister then wants stage 3 to be done and dusted on 31 October. That gives members and officials just two days to turn around amendments to a bill in which there is a great deal of interest. Parliament can act at pace, and it has done so on occasion in emergencies, but the only reason why we are being asked to do so on this occasion is to spare the Government’s blushes. That is because, under the law as it stands, which the bill seeks to amend, the Government has to produce a draft climate change plan by the end of November, and it is nowhere near doing that. That is the Government’s problem, which, quite frankly, is the Government’s fault. Parliament is not here to spare the Government’s blushes or to get it out of a hole. We are here to do our jobs properly.
The Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee has been very careful not to express a view on timetabling, but it has written about
“the importance of there being adequate time between stages 2 and 3 for the implications of any stage 2 amendment agreed in committee being carefully considered.”
I am grateful to Graham Simpson for taking an intervention. Of course, it is not for the committee to decide on stage 3—that is for the Parliament to do. However, it is right for the Parliament to take into account concern that the committee may have about the need for adequate time to be provided between stage 2, which will take place in committee, and the subsequent stage 3 proceedings in the chamber.
The purpose of Graham Simpson’s amendment to the business motion is to provide as much time as is reasonably practicable, given the challenge that the Government finds itself facing. We will support his amendment.
I am very pleased to hear that. Mr Whitfield is absolutely right, because in no one’s world—not even the minister’s, if he is honest about it—is two days enough. My amendment, if it is agreed to, would set the stage 3 date as 7 November. That is a week more than what the minister is proposing, and even that is probably too short.
The minister should see what I am proposing as a sensible compromise. Parliament needs to be able to do its job properly. Scrutiny is an essential part of our work here, but we need to have the time to do it. MSPs have a simple choice between the minister’s rushed two-day deadline and my nine-day one. It is quite obvious which is the better, and it is not the minister’s.
I move amendment S6M-14652.1, to leave out “31 October” and insert “7 November”.
I invite Jamie Hepburn to respond on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau.
16:54
First, I thank the Presiding Officer for reminding members that I speak on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau. The business motion represents the bureau’s position, not just mine.
The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, unless or until it is changed, requires the Government to introduce a draft climate change plan by 22 November this year to set out policies and proposals for meeting our emissions reduction targets. The Climate Change Committee has given conclusive advice that the 2030 target of 75 per cent emissions reductions that Parliament set in 2019 on a cross-party basis is out of reach. Therefore, we must adjust our target framework before we can introduce a credible climate change plan. To ensure that we are not in breach of legal obligations, we need to ensure that the bill that is before Parliament is enforced by 22 November to make the necessary changes to the law as it stands.
As Parliament is aware, the Scotland Act 1998 provides a four-week period after any bill is passed by the Scottish Parliament for the United Kingdom, the Scottish law officers and the Secretary of State for Scotland to consider that bill. The Presiding Officer cannot present a bill for royal assent until after that period has concluded. The period of time to obtain royal assent after that period is outwith the Government’s control but takes on average about one and a half weeks, which means that there is a period of about five and a half weeks after stage 3 before a bill can receive royal assent.
Although in exceptional circumstances the Government can ask the law officers and the secretary of state to agree to expedite their post-stage 3 considerations and advise the Presiding Officer that they do not intend to take any action to prohibit the Presiding Officer from seeking royal assent, the law officers and the UK Government cannot, of course, be compelled to do so. Therefore, seeking to agree a timetable that does not allow—
Will the minister take an intervention?
I think that it is important that Parliament hears this, after which I will give way to Mr Harvie.
Therefore, seeking to agree a timetable that does not allow sufficient time for the statutory post-stage 3 period risks the bill not being enforced on time and bringing the Government into breach of legal requirements. That is the position that Parliament could be determining this evening.
The minister is aware that Opposition parties on the Parliamentary Bureau understand the need for an expedited process—indeed, we have all acknowledged that we will not get the full, in-depth scrutiny that we would from a normal legislative process. However, given that the Government recognised the need for the bill months ago, why has it come to the point where it is asking for a process of just two days between stages 2 and 3? Does the minister really think that that is an adequate reflection period for members and the Government to understand the consequences of stage 2 amendments in order to frame stage 3 amendments? I do not think that that is enough. A week is about the bare minimum.
In ordinary circumstances, I would agree with the fundamental points that Patrick Harvie has made. Initially, it was my expectation that we could have worked with the committee so that we did not get into a situation and circumstances in which we would have to seek to engage with the UK Government. The Government will have to do so now, irrespective of the timescale that we agree this evening. We initially wanted a timescale that would not put us in that place and would have enabled Parliament to have sufficient time between stages 1, 2 and 3 to go through the usual process of consideration, albeit on an expedited basis.
Will the minister take an intervention?
I will give way in a minute, because I am about to mention the member.
Having engaged with its convener, I know that that was not the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee’s perspective, to which I had to listen. We got to a stage where, reluctantly, we were going to present a timescale that would have constrained time for Parliament but allowed us to complete the process by the October recess, which would have enabled us to meet the timeframe necessary for the UK Government to give consideration to these matters. However, it was clear that the committee was not inclined to go there, so we had to present an alternative timetable.
Once I have given way to Mr Mountain, I will go on to say where we are now.
I want to reiterate the timescales to Parliament. I do so as an individual, although I am the convener of the committee. In August 2023, we became aware that the Government would not meet the deadlines—in fact, a ministerial statement on 18 April this year told us so.
I met the Government on behalf of the committee in April, May, June, July, August and September, asking for the bill to be produced before 5 September. That was the date on which it was eventually laid in the chamber, which gave the committee precious little time to take evidence.
I would like it on record that the committee worked extremely hard to meet the Government’s deadlines, which have been unnecessarily tight, and would have been tight even if it had produced the bill when we originally asked for it in May. We are now at the stage where the committee has to meet during plenary sessions of the Parliament in order to get the bill to the stage 1 debate. It would be right for the minister to acknowledge the committee’s work and the fact that this problem is of his making, not the committee’s.
I will not denigrate the committee. I am very grateful for the time that the convener has given me, and I recognise that the committee has tried to accommodate the Government’s concerns as much as possible.
Mr Mountain’s intervention has just made me realise that I did not respond to one of Mr Harvie’s points. The challenge that we faced in producing the bill in the timescale that was laid out is that, first, we had to wait to hear what the Climate Change Committee had to say, and then we were immediately into an election period. I imagine that, if we as the Government had introduced a bill during that election period, we would right now be hearing a cacophony of noise from Opposition members saying, “How dare you introduce a bill during the election period?” That is why we had to wait.
Mr Simpson talked about a compromise position. Frankly, what is before us right now, in the name of the Parliamentary Bureau, and which I am asking Parliament to vote for, is the compromise position. The Government’s preference has been to get it done and dusted by the October recess, so that we would not be in danger of contravening what is required under the Scotland Act 1998 and putting the legal position at jeopardy, but it was clear that that was not going to be able to be carried.
I have been willing to compromise, and that is what is on the table right now. I think that we should agree to it and get on with it. Of course, whatever is agreed tonight will require me and the Government to engage with the UK Government to see whether we can secure a shortening of royal assent. However, Parliament should be aware that that cannot be guaranteed. If we agree to an even longer timescale this evening, we are in serious danger of putting that position in great jeopardy.
The question is, that amendment S6M-14652.1, in the name of Graham Simpson, which seeks to amend motion S6M-14652, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on the timetable for consideration of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division. There will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.
17:02 Meeting suspended.
We move to the vote on amendment S6M-14652.1, in the name of Graham Simpson. Members should cast their votes now.
The vote is closed.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My device was a little unclear as to whether it had refreshed on time. I would have voted for the amendment.
I can confirm that your vote was recorded, Mr Harvie.
For
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (Con)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)
Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Alba)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab)
Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Richard Leonard]
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con)
White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn]
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn]
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay]
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
The result of the division on amendment S6M-14652.1, in the name of Graham Simpson, is: For 60, Against 60, Abstentions 0.
The vote is tied. As is usual when the Parliament has not been able to reach a decision, I am obliged to exercise a casting vote. I will not make a decision for the Parliament. The established convention is to vote in favour of the status quo, because the chair is required to act impartially. Therefore, I cast my vote against the amendment.
Amendment disagreed to.
The next question is, that motion S6M-14652, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on the timetable for consideration of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
The vote is closed.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. It did not look as though my app had connected, but it has now told me that I did vote yes.
Thank you, Ms Haughey. I can confirm that that is the case and that your vote has been recorded.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn]
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn]
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay]
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (Con)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)
Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Alba)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab)
Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Richard Leonard]
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con)
White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
The result of the division on motion S6M-14652, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, is: For 60, Against 61, Abstentions 0.
Motion disagreed to.
As the motion has not been agreed to, we currently have no timetable for the bill. There is a scheduled meeting of the Parliamentary Bureau this evening, and, following discussion, we will revert to the Parliament on this matter.
The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-14640, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees—
(a) the following programme of business—
Tuesday 1 October 2024
2.00 pm Time for Reflection
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Topical Questions (if selected)
followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Aggregates Tax and Devolved Taxes Administration (Scotland) Bill
followed by Committee Announcements
followed by Business Motions
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members’ Business
followed by Members’ Business
Wednesday 2 October 2024
2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions
2.00 pm Portfolio Questions:
Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands;
Health and Social Care
followed by Scottish Labour Party Business
followed by Business Motions
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)
5.10 pm Decision Time
followed by Members’ Business
Thursday 3 October 2024
11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions
11.40 am General Questions
12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions
followed by Members’ Business
2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions
2.30 pm Portfolio Questions:
Social Justice
followed by Economy and Fair Work Committee Debate: Just Transition Inquiry for Grangemouth and the North East and Moray
followed by Business Motions
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
Tuesday 8 October 2024
2.00 pm Time for Reflection
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Topical Questions (if selected)
followed by Scottish Government Business
followed by Committee Announcements
followed by Business Motions
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
followed by Members’ Business
Wednesday 9 October 2024
2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions
2.00 pm Portfolio Questions:
Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, and Parliamentary Business;
Justice and Home Affairs
followed by Scottish Green Party Business
followed by Business Motions
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)
5.10 pm Decision Time
followed by Members’ Business
Thursday 10 October 2024
11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions
11.40 am General Questions
12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions
followed by Members’ Business
2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions
2.30 pm Portfolio Questions:
Education and Skills
followed by Stage 1 Debate: Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill
followed by Business Motions
followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions
5.00 pm Decision Time
(b) that, for the purposes of Portfolio Questions in the week beginning 30 September 2024, in rule 13.7.3, after the word “except” the words “to the extent to which the Presiding Officer considers that the questions are on the same or similar subject matter or” are inserted.—[Jamie Hepburn]
Motion agreed to.
Previous
Additional Support for Learning