Meeting of the Parliament 21 December 2023
I will start with a quote from the opening paragraph of the Scottish Government’s webpage on the Open Government Partnership.
“As members of the Open Government Partnership, we’re working alongside governments from all over the world to open up government by committing to the values of openness, transparency, accountability and citizen participation.”
Juliet Swann from Transparency International UK has said that
“a lack of complete transparency leads to rumour, hearsay and conjecture which all undermine the principle of openness which was so celebrated”
by the Scottish Parliament when it was first founded.
I will go back to a motion that was passed by the chamber on 3 May 2023. It said:
“That the Parliament agrees that good governance and transparency are matters of the utmost importance”.
I again reflect on the Nolan principles of objectivity, accountability and openness. Those principles say that “Holders of public office” must “act and take decisions” impartially and fairly, and be held to account. Those decisions should be taken
“in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear, lawful reasons for so doing.”
In 1997, the chosen founding principles of the Scottish Parliament were accountability, being open and encouraging participation, power sharing and equality of opportunity.
We have heard from the minister about the Scottish Government’s commitment to parliamentary scrutiny. The situation that is before us is as follows. On 18 December, two of the land commissioner posts became vacant. The chair vacancy does not arise until 18 March next year. Douglas Lumsden’s amendment would allow the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee the opportunity to review the decision—not about all three nominees but about one nominee who will not take their seat until next year. It may well be—I strongly disagree with the previous speech—that the person who has been appointed is the best person to hold the post.
I agree with the cabinet secretary that there is evidence that the committee said that it was going to follow the procedure that had been adopted in the past before it knew the names of any nominees. During the current and previous parliamentary sessions, members and the Scottish Government have spoken about the importance of honouring scrutiny. That allows a person to take up a role knowing that their appointment has been fully scrutinised, so that the people of Scotland can have absolute confidence that that person is the right person for the job. That is recognised in the founding principles of the Parliament. The Scottish Government has an opportunity to take what I agree is a difficult decision. However, that decision will not hinder the work of the commission, because two of the commissioners have been supported and could take up the vacant post.
I do not speak on behalf of the committee, nor do I intend to. I am sure, however, that the chair can have a public hearing before the date that they take up the post in order to reassure themselves that—just as the minister is confident that the information that she was given during the recruitment process is accurate—they can be confident that the principles have been applied accurately and that the right person is being appointed for the job. Irrespective of the individuals concerned, we have an opportunity to say to the people of Scotland, “We are transparent. We stand by that. Even when it is a challenge, we support it.”
13:24