Hansard

When we debated the bill at stage 1, I waited until my closing speech before I thanked everyone who had taken part in the deliberations on the bill, because I was worried that there would be nothing left for me to say if at the outset I gave those people due recognition for their contributions. However worth while a bill is, there is little that can be said when everyone agrees on every aspect of it.

On this occasion, therefore, I have decided to thank the clerks, members of the Finance Committee and, in particular, Duncan McNeil and other members of the Local Government and Communities Committee in my opening speech, for fear that if I thanked them at the end of the debate everyone might be asleep and miss it.

In my closing speech at stage 1, I noted that during the debate committee members had raised some caveats that had been included in the committee’s report and I welcomed the fact that those issues would be considered during stage 2. I did not think that there would be much controversy, but I lived in hope that any discussion would give us new material to debate at stage 3.

How disappointed I was, therefore, to learn that the three amendments that the minister moved at stage 2 passed without discussion and that the entire process lasted less than three minutes. In the time that it takes to boil an egg, the committee agreed to two amendments to address the Electoral Commission’s education function in relation to local government systems, and one that enabled the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, rather than the United Kingdom ombudsman, to consider any issues that might arise as a result of the Electoral Commission’s work in relation to Scottish local government elections. Not even giving more powers to the ombudsman drew Alex Neil into the debate to liven it up. There was not a cheep from the ombudsman’s arch-enemy, let alone one of his dog-whistle rants.

Here we are at stage 3 with consensus not so much achieved as maintained throughout. All political parties recognise the need for the bill and agree with it. We will see whether managing local government elections in the way that the bill envisages maintains that consensus, but I hope that the good will that surrounds the bill will enable that to happen.

I am happy to reiterate my belief that greater and more effective management of local elections will provide for their smoother running. The proposed greater powers for the EMB should be reviewed at some time in the future to see how they are working. I am sure that that will happen and I am glad that the minister has indicated that he has a similar view. That approach should not only benefit all political parties but reassure the electorate that the system is run for their benefit, first and foremost.

By passing the bill, we will show that the Parliament can learn from past mistakes. It is with some regret that I express a wish that the current Westminster Tory coalition had not ignored the lessons that we have learned and decided to press ahead with its ill-advised referendum on the same day as the forthcoming Scottish Parliament election. Let us hope that the arrogance of our UK Government does not cause us to have to address the aftermath of another electoral shambles in May. The lack of interest in the referendum may be the main reason why that will not happen.

However, today is about the bill, which is to be welcomed.

09:32