Hansard

As members know, this item is an opportunity for MSPs to seek additions to the future business programme. In speaking to the business motion, I ask the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans to make a statement to Parliament about how we, as MSPs, can get answers from the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body.

Once again, the SPCB is in the news, because of the shameful conduct that we have seen in relation to a protest that Police Scotland was looking after outside this Parliament, whereby Susan Smith of For Women Scotland has been called to a police station to consider accepting a penalty notice from the police for the apparently heinous crime of touching someone’s umbrella, which—from the footage that I have seen—looked as though it was already broken before she even touched it. Frankly, it is ridiculous that that has happened, and I think that we need to question the corporate body about the matter.

Earlier today, Tess White put a question to the First Minister on the subject, but the response that she got was very disappointing. I tried to lodge an urgent question to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body today, but that was rejected by the Presiding Officer. I cannot question why it was rejected, because the Presiding Officer does not give her reasons.

Therefore, I thought that the best option was to seek a statement from the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body next week, to allow us, as MSPs, to question it about the discussions that it has had with Police Scotland about the protest back in September and about the fact that one of our constituents has now been taken through the criminal process by Police Scotland for, as I mentioned, touching someone’s umbrella.

However, I believe—if I have read standing orders correctly—that there is no mechanism to seek a statement from the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, and I think that that is a state of affairs that should change. Perhaps it is just luck and good fortune on my part that I am putting that point to the convener of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in his role as a member of the Parliamentary Bureau.

I wonder, therefore, whether Mr Whitfield would consider asking the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans to come to Parliament next week to suggest options whereby members of the corporate body would be able to provide a statement on the issue, which would allow us to question them. I believe that SPCB question time will not take place until 27 November, which is a long time away, and there are serious questions to be asked about the policing of the event back in September, the issues that have arisen over the past few days in relation to the penalties that Susan Smith may be facing from Police Scotland and the very welcome backtracking that we have now seen from Police Scotland.

If the SPCB can discuss those matters with the police in its role as the corporate body of the Parliament, it should be accountable to the Parliament. I hope that that will enable us to get answers on how the event was originally policed back in September, when one disruptive individual went above and beyond in seeking to destroy the efforts of two legitimate protests that were held that day, and subsequent police actions. We need answers from the very top, because what happened to Susan Smith did not get signed off by someone low down the chain in Police Scotland. It is clear that the decision went far higher than that. We need to know how what happened was allowed to happen, why it happened and what is going to be done to make sure that it never happens again.

I remind members of what is stated in my entry in the register of members’ interests: my wife is a serving officer with Police Scotland.