Hansard

I thank members for their contributions, and I thank COSLA and, in particular, those in its political leadership, who have been absolutely relentless over the past four years in driving towards the line and trying to get the bill back over the line. It has been great to work with them. I also thank Roz Thomson from the non-Government bills unit, who has kept the bill on life support over the past five years.

Before returning to Holyrood in 2016, I spent five years as a councillor in Stirling, and it really left a mark on me, with the importance of strong, accountable, empowered local government. It is absolutely critical; it is the level of government that works closest to the people.

Comments have been made about the Verity house agreement. I do not view it as an end point; it is a start, and it has helped to reset the relationship. I agree with Alex Cole-Hamilton and Alexander Stewart that there is a long way to go.

The bill gives us an opportunity to embed the principles further into the work of both the Scottish Government and the Parliament in the next session. I note that the Verity house agreement committed the Government to embed the European charter into law. That is what local government wants, and it is normal across Europe. If we can get the amendments through and get the bill over the line, that is exactly what it will do.

I will make some brief comments about the amendments that the Government will be proposing. Sections 4 and 5, on interpretation and declarations of incompatibility, will be amended to restrict their application to acts of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish statutory instruments. As the cabinet secretary has outlined, the Government amendments will go further than the two sections of the bill as considered by the UK Supreme Court. They will include amendments, under section 2, to the duty on Scottish ministers to act compatibly with the charter.

We have heard that that is being done on the basis that the Scottish Government, through engagement with the UK Government, has not been able to rule out the possibility of a further referral if section 2 is not amended during the reconsideration stage. That is regrettable. I would ask Mark Griffin to reflect on the fact that there has been a conversation between two Governments—a Labour Government and an SNP Government—and I would have preferred those amendments on section 2 not to have been drafted. However, we are where we are. The amendments will reduce the reach and effect of the bill, because much legislation in devolved areas, such as in education, is still contained within the UK legislation.

My priority, as the designated member, is to see the bill pass the reconsideration stage, avoiding any further referral to the UK Supreme Court. COSLA is content with that approach. It is disappointing that it has taken so long to get clarity on that point from the UK Government but, on balance, it is a lot better to have a bill moved to royal assent than for it to be struck down again and to have an uncertain future, dragging into session 7 of the Parliament.

I will end with the words of Andy Wightman, who said in the stage 3 debate five years ago:

“We are strengthening our democracy; in particular, we are strengthening the institution of our system of government that lies closest to the people … so that it might serve them better and more effectively and be more responsive to the wishes of local communities, rather than the political imperatives in Edinburgh.”—[Official Report, 23 March 2021; c 80.]

I agreed with those words then and I agree with them now. I urge members to back the motion for reconsideration of the Euro charter bill.