Hansard

I remind colleagues for the last time that I am a councillor of Aberdeen City.

Before re-entering active politics in 2016, I spent many years lecturing on the MBA programme at the Aberdeen business school. A regular guest lecturer was the chief executive of Aberdeen City Council. After one talk, a Chinese student declared that she was confused. Why, she asked, did Chinese local government, under the centralised command economy of communist China, have more freedoms and discretion than local authorities in Scotland and in so-called liberal western democracies? It was a good question.

The local government charter is wide ranging, containing some 11 articles. The financial article, article 9, is the one that I find most interesting. It includes the right for local government to be fully consulted and to decide on local taxation and its rate—and to keep it—the right to a fair distribution of resources, the right not to have financial support ring fenced and the right to use its funds how it wishes.

If we consider that, since 2013-14, local government has had a budget cut of 2.4 per cent against a Government real-terms increase of 3.1 per cent, and that, according to COSLA, there are more than 30 ring-fenced projects in existence, we can see that the bill that we are passing today requires a step change in the relationship between the Scottish Government and local authorities. In short, the message to this SNP centralising Government is, “Get your central controlling tank off our local authority lawn.”

The bill, which incorporates the European Charter of Local Self-Government, is not before its time, and I will certainly be supporting it tonight.

Since this is my last contribution in the chamber, I will record a few thanks. First, I thank my team: David Hill in Edinburgh, Michele Binnie and Rami Jerrow in Aberdeen and the various other people who have assisted me during my period as an MSP. I also thank my wife Kate and my family, who have never failed to give their support. I particularly thank them for accommodating the increasing onset and influence of Parkinson’s, which, although well medicated, has destroyed my ability to write and, over recent months, has limited my contributions. To that end, I thank the parliamentary authorities for allowing me additional resources to assist me with the problem. Without exception, the parliamentary support staff and administration, the clerks and information technology staff have been commendable. I thank you all.

I first campaigned on behalf of my mother for chairmanship of Bishop’s Stortford Council as long ago as 1960. I was a Grampian regional councillor long before this Assembly was conceived. In 2017, after 20 years as a justice of the peace, I became a councillor again in Aberdeen. In the same year, I arrived—unexpectedly at my age—as an MSP. I was not the oldest, as Gil Paterson pipped me for that honour, although I did become a committee convener, albeit for only two minutes.

I have retained my local government connections throughout—indeed, on leaving this place, I will continue to serve as a councillor in Aberdeen. It is for others to judge my contribution over the past few years, but I will always remember falling out with the First Minister over Aberdeen art gallery, and even ending up as an advocate for croquet during the pandemic—a wry joke, but with a serious point about the value of sport for physical and mental health. It has been an honour and a privilege to serve North East Scotland, even if I never understood a word from some of my Doric-speaking constituents.

My long career in politics has given me great expectations for this Parliament. I believe that its creators all wanted it to be creative, inclusive, collaborative, transparent, proportional and family friendly, and in some ways it has achieved that. The Public Petitions Committee, on which I sit, has opened up an amazing range of issues, and if they have not been resolved, they have certainly been explored. The friendliness of the building, and the respectful nature of the staff and MSPs of all parties, provide continual encouragement. I have attended debates in which members have demonstrated extensive knowledge, understanding and compassion.

However, the Parliament’s ambition to be proportional and family friendly deprives it of its organic and creative characteristics. Members look to their party bosses for their continued inclusion, and not to the electorate. The parliamentary arithmetic drives the number and length of questions, the number of speakers and the number of minutes for each speech, regardless of content. On many occasions, time has driven out knowledgeable and meaningful contributions, allowing poorly constructed bills on to the statute book. It is a case of “Never mind the quality—feel the width.” At least we all get home for tea at 6. There is no real sign of collaboration, and in the end sizeable minorities have been abandoned, to the benefit of very small vested interests.

In ending, I will tell members a short salutary tale. Some time ago, before the earth was round, or at least before Facebook and Twitter were invented, there was a radio programme for younger listeners called “4D Special”. It had a competition to compose a mini saga of not more than 50 words. This was the winning entry.

Three pigs in a bed. The big pig said, “Roll over,” the next pig said, “Roll over,” and the little pig on the end said, “Don’t roll over, I will fall out of bed and die.” They voted. So the big pig rolled over, the next pig rolled over, the little pig on the end rolled over and fell out of bed, and died! Democracy!