Committee
Procedures Committee, 09 May 2006
09 May 2006 · S2 · Procedures Committee
Item of business
Parliamentary Time
We can approach the business managers for additional time only if we know that an issue will attract an awful lot of amendments at stage 3. How the Parliament and the committees handle their legislative role has changed and the debate on whether there is enough time to discuss amendments at stage 3 has moved on. In the previous session, hundreds of amendments were lodged at stage 3 but, judging by how we have dealt with legislation during the current session, I think that the number of amendments that are now lodged at stage 3 has decreased because we are becoming more experienced parliamentarians and are able to deal with the issues at stage 2. Like Karen Gillon, I do not know whether the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill will attract an awful lot of stage 3 amendments. We cannot arbitrarily pick a bill for a trial over a day and a half. A decision must be made as we deal with a bill.I thought that business managers had agreed that if many amendments had been lodged to a bill and an issue had attracted a lot of attention from members and the public, they would be flexible about extending the time for stage 3. We must ensure that we have that commitment from business managers, rather than asking for an experiment when we do not know whether it is needed.
In the same item of business
The Convener:
LD
There are two papers that relate to the review of parliamentary time. One is a general summary of evidence received. The other was prepared by the clerk and ...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
To which paper are you referring, convener?
The Convener:
LD
The second paper, on the selection of speakers and speaking times. On page 6, the clerk has set out in bold type some of the points that arise.
Mr Bruce McFee (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Andrew Mylne has set out the current position. Current practice varies widely from the rules for the Presiding Officers on ensuring balance and the order in ...
The Convener:
LD
That is helpful. There is obviously a conflict between allowing flexibility in the number of speakers and in the length of speeches, and having set voting ti...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab):
Lab
We have to address the issue of Opposition time that is split into two different debates, which causes real pressure. The only times that I recall being give...
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
On behalf of the Opposition parties, I have to say that it is essential that it is left to Opposition parties to decide how to use the small amount of time t...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
It depends whether one thinks that the time belongs to the Opposition or to the Parliament and whether its purpose is to allow an issue to be debated or to g...
Cathie Craigie:
Lab
We need to discuss the issue. When we fell into the habit of holding split debates towards the end of the first session of Parliament, some of the larger par...
Mr McFee:
SNP
What has been said underlines my point. I accept what Karen Gillon said about Opposition parties cramming in two debates on complex subjects in the same morn...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
I am slightly confused about why we are considering speaking times first. We are starting at the back rather than at the front. We need to begin with a funda...
Alex Johnstone:
Con
To play devil's advocate, the fundamental issue that we must address at the beginning is whether the principle of family-friendly hours is sacrosanct or whet...
The Convener:
LD
I accept the substance of what seems to be the committee's feeling. Without getting too heavily involved, I think that there are some points on which we coul...
Mr McFee:
SNP
Those would all be good points if the final decision is that we adhere to a pretty strict timetable, but we have not taken that decision yet. Many of those i...
The Convener:
LD
The general view seems to be that we will park paper PR/S2/06/8/3, which is helpful, until we consider a paper on parliamentary hours and so on, into which t...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
I am interested in having a discussion with the Executive on interpellations, which are an interesting concept. I am interested in hearing the Executive's vi...
Alex Johnstone:
Con
Would the best option not be to prepare the paper and then ask for comments from the Executive?
Mr McFee:
SNP
Yes.
Karen Gillon:
Lab
I do not care how we do it.
Mr McFee:
SNP
We have to engage individual members on this as well as the Executive. It might be useful to suggest a possible structure.
The Convener:
LD
Some time ago, we wrote to the Executive saying that we thought that there should be an experiment whereby the two parts of stage 3 were separated, so that t...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
My recollection is not the same as yours, convener. As I recall, we suggested that the Executive should look to have the whole of the stage 3 proceedings acr...
The Convener:
LD
Well, so long as there is more time. Are you suggesting that there should be a day and a half for amendments? What would we offer?
Karen Gillon:
Lab
It is hard to tell. If the committees say that there are not enough amendments to sustain the debate, it would be difficult for us to say that we should have...
Cathie Craigie:
Lab
We can approach the business managers for additional time only if we know that an issue will attract an awful lot of amendments at stage 3. How the Parliamen...
Mr McFee:
SNP
In some circumstances, there is a case for taking a day and a half or even two days to complete stage 3. That has been amply demonstrated. With hindsight at ...
Alex Johnstone:
Con
That hits the nail on the head about stage 3. Timetabling at stage 3 is our single biggest problem. In the past year, we have seen several examples of bad de...
The Convener:
LD
In the short term, is it reasonable to pursue Cathie Craigie's suggestion that we should write to tell the Minister for Parliamentary Business that we cannot...
The Convener:
LD
As Bruce McFee and Alex Johnstone said, a longer-term issue agitates many of us. We will try to pursue that but, for the moment, we will keep the ball in play.