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, 16 Apr 2026 – 16 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 (Hybrid) 25 November 2020

25 Nov 2020 · S5 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Legal Advice (Publication)

As members have said, here we are again. I had thought that the SNP would, after it lost the crucial vote in the chamber three weeks ago on a motion that had cross-party backing, surely reconsider its approach, and release the legal advice that it was given on the Salmond judicial review. The Scottish people deserve nothing less. After all, £500,000 of taxpayers’ cash has been wasted on the SNP Government’s botched handling of claims of sexual harassment. In fact, as we heard in the chamber today, the cost could be nearer £1 million. Even £500,000 would be enough to pay the annual salaries of about 15 registered nurses in Scotland.

However, perhaps my optimism got the better of me. The SNP continues to dig in its heels, shamefully ignoring the voices of committee members and MSPs who simply want the issue to be resolved. We want to move on. Unfortunately, this latest move is symbolic of the Government’s arrogance and of its genuinely contemptuous attitude to the Scottish Parliament. This Parliament, which is supposed to represent openness and transparency, will not stand for it. Therefore, why should the people of Scotland? It is that simple.

The investigative committee also deserves full transparency and co-operation from the Scottish Government. However, it has become all too clear that this Government has made every attempt to hinder the committee’s ability to fulfil its duties. The Deputy First Minister’s blocking of two key witnesses is just the latest example of obstruction in a long-running pattern of behaviour from the SNP leadership. What on earth have they got to hide? The release of the legal advice is an essential step in providing the committee with the ability to assess the full picture. There should be no ifs and no buts—the Government must hand over all the necessary documentation so that the committee can thoroughly investigate, and do the job that it has been assigned.

There is clear precedent for the Scottish Government releasing legal advice, given that it has done so on various occasions, ranging from the trams inquiry to the UK infected blood inquiry. At Westminster, there has been a litany of calls from SNP members of Parliament for the UK Government to release legal advice on a series of issues. Whether it is the European Union withdrawal agreement, the Benn act or Syria air strikes, the SNP has certainly not been shy in demanding that others release legal advice when it thinks that that would suit its goals. That is, quite frankly, breathtaking hypocrisy, and we will continue to call it out.

I am afraid that the Government’s current position cannot stand any longer. The public are frustrated that the debacle has not been brought to a close.

As has already been mentioned, the Scottish Parliament provided a clear instruction to the SNP Government to release the legal advice immediately. That call has, unfortunately, fallen on deaf ears, to the detriment of the Parliament’s reputation. I agree with Douglas Ross: if the SNP continues to dodge scrutiny and ignore Parliament, legal action might be necessary in order to force it to come clean. For the time being, however, power remains in the SNP’s hands.

There is still time to do the right thing and to co-operate fully with the committee, which the First Minister had previously promised that the SNP Government would do. It is high time that that commitment was honoured. I hope for the sake of the Parliament and people of Scotland that the SNP chooses to do that, before it is too late.

17:25  

In the same item of business

The Presiding Officer (Ken Macintosh) NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S5M-23445, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on legal advice. I encourage all members who wish to contribute to pr...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
Three weeks ago, Parliament resolved that the Scottish Government should hand over to the Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complai...
The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills (John Swinney) SNP
Earlier this month, when Parliament last debated this issue, I set out the reasons why Scottish ministers considered that the balance of public interest lay ...
Murdo Fraser Con
The Deputy First Minister is aware that the committee has been asking for sight of that legal advice, not in the past three weeks but for many months before ...
John Swinney SNP
I will make two points. The first is that, although the committee has been asking for the legal advice, the Government has been maintaining its position, whi...
Alex Cole-Hamilton (Edinburgh Western) (LD) LD
The Deputy First Minister’s recollection of the Lord Advocate’s evidence to our committee is correct. One of the things that the Lord Advocate would not disc...
John Swinney SNP
I think that Mr Cole-Hamilton knows the answer to that, but I presume that he raises it so that I can confirm it. The ministerial code prevents me from disc...
Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Lab
It is tempting to make the same speech that I made the last time we debated this issue, because in the past three weeks, absolutely nothing has changed—not o...
John Swinney SNP
Would Jackie Baillie care to share with Parliament any of the detail of the correspondence that I shared with the committee about the obligations that I am u...
Jackie Baillie Lab
I would be happy to share that. It is available on the website. However, I say to the cabinet secretary that he has had not just the time that the committee ...
Andy Wightman (Lothian) (Green) Green
Here we go again. As members have already stated, the Parliament expressed its will in unequivocal terms and voted on 4 November. I want to reflect on the qu...
Alex Cole-Hamilton (Edinburgh Western) (LD) LD
We should not be having this debate. I say to Government members who will likely criticise the use of parliamentary time for a topic such as this in the midd...
The Presiding Officer NPA
I am conscious that this is a debate, so I have given as much time as possible for interventions. However, we are pushed for time, so members have only four ...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
Three weeks have elapsed since the Scottish Parliament agreed to a motion calling on the Scottish Government to publish all the legal advice that it received...
Stewart Stevenson (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) SNP
I start by agreeing with Murdo Fraser when he sympathised with the complainers, which was entirely proper. Let us look at precedents in relation to the disc...
James Kelly (Glasgow) (Lab) Lab
Here we go again. For the second time in three weeks, we are having a debate that concentrates on the release of legal advice pertaining to the judicial revi...
James Dornan (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) SNP
Yesterday, we saw the Parliament at its finest, working across parties to pass an important piece of legislation for people across the whole of Scotland. It ...
Murdo Fraser Con
On a point of order, Presiding Officer, I am sure that you are aware that standing orders require members to address the terms of the topic of the debate. We...
The Presiding Officer NPA
I have been following the member’s contribution with close interest, Mr Fraser. He has been making a point. However, he has now made his point with his compa...
James Dornan SNP
Thank you, Presiding Officer—although I have to say that pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories is very important to what the debate is all about. As my c...
Annie Wells (Glasgow) (Con) Con
As members have said, here we are again. I had thought that the SNP would, after it lost the crucial vote in the chamber three weeks ago on a motion that had...
Shona Robison (Dundee City East) (SNP) SNP
I begin by reiterating what I said in the debate on 4 November. I made three points then on the issue of legal advice, and I wish to repeat them. First, as ...
Jackie Baillie Lab
Now we know. We know from today’s speeches, from the briefings to the SNP group and from the reports to their meetings by John Swinney that the Scottish Gove...
John Swinney SNP
I will reflect on a couple of the contributions, because they illustrate the arguments that I gave in my opening speech. Stewart Stevenson brought his deep ...
John Swinney SNP
I will develop the point and happily give way to Jackie Baillie. I made the point earlier that ministers today have a duty to ministers in the future, which...
Jackie Baillie Lab
The fundamental difference that John Swinney fails to mention is that we never faced, and lost, a vote in the Parliament and were never in a situation in whi...
John Swinney SNP
That is not the fundamental point; the fundamental point is the maintenance of legal professional privilege, which has existed in law for all time, and which...
Andy Wightman Green
Can we take it from the cabinet secretary’s observations that he has no intention of publishing any legal advice in relation to the judicial review?
John Swinney SNP
I am simply airing to the Parliament the issues with which I have to wrestle. I am the minister who will have to decide on the question, and I am simply airi...
Donald Cameron (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Con
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests as a member of the Faculty of Advocates. I will begin on a bit of a tangent, and I hope th...