Meeting of the Parliament 20 December 2022
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My amendment 128 is on data and is in group 13, which is a very large group that will be debated for a long time. I feel that the amendment is wrongly placed in that group. I accept that amendment 128 overlaps with other amendments in that group, but I believe that it should be placed in group 19, which also deals with data.
I am concerned that there is a lot to address under group 13. I have lodged three other amendments and I feel that my contribution on data might be compromised.
The legislation team, who I thank for all that they have done this week, have advised me that there is no time limit on speeches. I know that that is technically correct, but it is important to clarify the point. I certainly do not want to take up unnecessary time in making my points under group 13. There was scope for the legislation team to place amendment 128 in another group, where there would be more space for it, if I can put it that way.
Presiding Officer, if it is your ruling that amendment 128 should remain in group 13, will you confirm that you can indulge me with the time that is needed to speak to my substantive amendments in that group and to address the question of data? Alternatively, will you consider my representation that the amendment would be better placed in group 19?
I do not raise the point to waste the Parliament’s time. It is important for members to feel that they have some ownership of groupings, which can be a bit of a mystery in the legislative process. The placement of amendment 128 stands out to me as being clearly arguable.