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 19 March 2026 [Draft]

19 Mar 2026 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time
Edinburgh Accommodation Allowance

The corporate body has met the additional costs of the second home premium on members’ leased Edinburgh accommodation since it was first introduced in 2024. Provision of funding to cover the second home premium is provided in addition to the annual allocation. Continuation of that support has been built into the new members’ expenses scheme, as the need for on-going additional support was recognised by the corporate body during its recent review of the scheme, prior to the new session.

As there is no individual impact for members or call on their individual allocation, there is no need to review the Edinburgh accommodation allowance in the light of the City of Edinburgh Council’s decision to increase the premium that is paid on second homes from 100 per cent to 300 per cent. As I have already mentioned, on-going payment of the premium, regardless of the amount, has already been accounted for in the proposed new scheme. That scheme will be considered by the Parliament later today when I move a motion, which I hope that Douglas Lumsden will support.

In practice, any increase will be added directly to a member’s allocation, as per the scheme rules in paragraph 2.1.5. The SPCB’s view remains that those homes are second homes that are required for work purposes and, as such, should be exempt from payment of second-home premiums. We will therefore write to the council to reiterate that point.

In the same item of business