Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 17 Apr 2026 – 17 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 22 April 2015

22 Apr 2015 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Members’ Interests Bill

I want to start by quickly reflecting on the background to the committee’s work on updating the members’ interests statute. The committee should be commended for moving quickly to utilise the powers that arose from the implementation of the Scotland Act 2012, which gave the Parliament the ability to review the terms of the members’ interests framework in full.

We now anticipate that the Parliament will soon be responsible for all matters that are relevant to its internal operations, which is something that we have argued for since the first session of the Parliament and which this Government has advocated since coming to office. It is good that there is a general consensus that that is an area for which the Parliament should have responsibility. That default position—which is the normal position for Parliaments around the world—is only right, so I welcome the opportunity that the debate gives us to consider the substance of the proposals that are contained in the committee’s report.

The subject matter of the debate is clearly a matter for the Parliament, but I wish to take the opportunity to put the Government’s views on the record, which I hope will be helpful to the committee and to the Parliament as a whole.

I consider that the reform package that is proposed by the committee represents a significant and progressive step forward. It is good to re-emphasise what the convener said—the reform package is about making the regime more transparent and more robust. We already have transparent and robust procedures in place, but it is always appropriate for us to look at how they can be improved. It is correct that that is being done.

I am pleased to confirm that the Government is supportive of the committee’s proposals and that it considers it appropriate for a bill to be brought forward to implement them. It will, I believe, be the first committee bill for some time.

Members of the committee will recall that, during the consultation process, the Government identified two issues that it believed required careful consideration. The first was that of whether failure to register or declare an interest should no longer be a criminal offence, and the second was whether a rectification process should be introduced to deal separately with minor instances of non-compliance and thus avoid investigation of such cases by the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland.

In its response to the consultation, the Government put forward a number of arguments about the merits of implementing such policies. In particular, we were concerned that either move could be perceived as diluting the accountability of MSPs, and we therefore welcome the fact that, after careful consideration of the consultation responses, the committee has decided not to proceed with these measures.

As for the proposals that the committee seeks to implement, I particularly welcome the end of dual reporting of members’ financial interests to both the Parliament and the Electoral Commission. The benefits of this reform are twofold. First, it will streamline the registration process for MSPs, ending a confusing and potentially disruptive arrangement; and, secondly, it will provide the public with a single point of reference as well as a single complaints system for any perceived instances of non-compliance. Both benefits are very important. That said, it would be wrong to underestimate the challenges that the committee has faced in seeking to combine the two different registration schemes and the fact that it has done so without undermining the robustness of either scheme or adding unnecessary complexity is a significant achievement that I hope the whole Parliament will recognise.

The proposals also reflect the Parliament’s founding principles by seeking to deliver parity for MSPs. First of all, they seek to end dual reporting for independent members, despite existing statutory mechanisms being based on members of political parties, and—on the other side of the coin—require independent members to be made subject to the requirement on members of political parties to register controlled transactions such as a credit facility extended to an MSP for political activities.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith) Lab
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-12951, in the name of Stewart Stevenson, on the proposal for a members’ interests bill. I call Stewart St...
Stewart Stevenson (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) SNP
The role of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee is to keep the Parliament’s procedures and processes under constant review. The Scotl...
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Joe FitzPatrick) SNP
I want to start by quickly reflecting on the background to the committee’s work on updating the members’ interests statute. The committee should be commended...
Stewart Stevenson SNP
Colleagues might find it useful to know that I have discussed the proposals with each of our present independent members. I note that none of them is going t...
Joe FitzPatrick SNP
I am sure that they would hold that view, because the committee has managed to ensure that the founding principle of treating all MSPs equally is fully refle...
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab) Lab
As a new member of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee who was appointed to it after it had heard evidence on the proposed bill, I th...
Stewart Stevenson SNP
Will Patricia Ferguson take an intervention?
Patricia Ferguson Lab
I am certainly happy to.
The Deputy Presiding Officer Lab
Very briefly, Mr Stevenson. I am afraid that the member is coming to a close.
Stewart Stevenson SNP
That is fine.
The Deputy Presiding Officer Lab
No. Please carry on, but I had to remind the member that she is to come to a close.
Stewart Stevenson SNP
Speaking personally and not as the committee convener, I take a different view from Patricia Ferguson on that issue, not because I do not think that more can...
Patricia Ferguson Lab
I am not sure that in the time that is allotted to me I can fully respond to Mr Stevenson’s concerns. I was going to go on to say that I was really pleased f...
Cameron Buchanan (Lothian) (Con) Con
There is so much to learn when a new member comes into the Parliament. I have to say that I found the rules and regulations of the SPPA Committee quite daunt...
The Deputy Presiding Officer Lab
Two members wish to contribute in the open debate. I call Gil Paterson. 16:26
Gil Paterson (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) SNP
Before I start, Presiding Officer, I wonder whether you will indulge me, since this is my first opportunity to speak. I want to record a personal message of ...
John Pentland (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab) Lab
I note that the lowering of the threshold for registered gifts is being undertaken to comply with the recommendation of the group of states against corruptio...
Cameron Buchanan Con
It is not worth saying much more than that, in the words of Nicholas Parsons, there should be no repetition, no duplication and no hesitation. I do not think...
The Deputy Presiding Officer Lab
That gives me a little bit of time in hand for the rest of the closing speeches, if members wish to use it. 16:36
Neil Bibby (West Scotland) (Lab) Lab
I, too, thank the members of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee for their work in producing the draft bill and the work that they ar...
Stewart Stevenson SNP
The member will have noted that a few references have been made to paid advocacy. Would it be useful for us all to think about what “paid” means? It is not j...
Neil Bibby Lab
Yes, and I anticipate that the committee will consider those issues. As my colleague Patricia Ferguson said, the public sometimes do not appreciate the nicet...
Stewart Stevenson SNP
If we accept the principle that there should not be outside jobs, why should there be a ban only on MSPs or MPs being directors or consultants? Why not a ban...
Neil Bibby Lab
Those are two roles that could have an impact on the public’s perception with regard to conflicts of interest. The committee should certainly start to consid...
Joe FitzPatrick SNP
This has been a good and consensual debate that has reflected the approach that the committee has taken to moving forward on the issue. There has been genera...
Neil Bibby Lab
I am aware that ministers need to complete a register of ministers’ interests. Why is that not published online and publicly available? Does the minister bel...
Joe FitzPatrick SNP
Ministers have to fill out the parliamentary register of members’ interests in the same way as every other member does. They are not exempt from any of the p...
Neil Bibby Lab
I contacted SPICe about the issue. It said that the Scottish Government maintains its own register of interests for ministers, which is not published. Will t...
Joe FitzPatrick SNP
Although there are perhaps other registers, all ministers are obliged to comply with the same rules as every other member of the Parliament is. Ministers go ...
Patricia Ferguson Lab
It would be helpful if the minister clarified whether there is a ministerial register—that is the point. If there is, why is it not published? A member could...