The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 861 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
Okay.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
I want to go back to the processes that are in place at the moment. In the course of the committee’s evidence sessions, many suggestions have been made about how to handle the situation. There is the idea of a regional by-election, which we have discussed. Other witnesses have said that if recall triggers are met by a regional MSP, they should automatically be disqualified and replaced by the next person on the list. What are your thoughts on those proposals? Are you likely to consider changes to that process for stage 2?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
In the bill, there is currently a two-step process for regional members in which people would first have to sign a recall petition and then there would be a yes or no ballot on whether to remove the member. A suggestion has been made to put those steps together into a one-step process, which would mean that electors would have the opportunity to say yes or no from the beginning. There have been suggestions that that might improve secrecy around the recall petition. If you go to sign a recall petition, everybody knows that you are going to try to remove that MSP. There is no option to turn up and support them. What are your thoughts on that proposal?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
You are talking about fairness and saying that if we do something on the constituency side it should happen on the regional side. Currently, the bill provides for a by-election on the constituency side in which the recalled member can stand but not one on the regional side. If you had a one-step process on both sides, they would be closer to each other than the current proposal.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
Why not?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
Okay. I will pass over to Sue Webber.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
We have heard evidence that a recall petition should close early if the 10 per cent threshold is met before the four weeks runs out. Your policy memorandum makes arguments about why that might not be appropriate. Has any of the evidence that we have taken so far changed your mind on that?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
I note that the equality impact assessment states that religion is not applicable. The parliamentary calendar works around Christian holidays, so might there be an interaction there? I am also thinking about those who are likely to be targeted with hate crimes. There have been situations in which MSPs have been targeted because of their religion, which would perhaps come into play in a recall situation.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
I am talking about the 10-day limit, how an individual trigger is likely to be viewed and whether such characteristics might come into play when folk decide how to treat the trigger.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Emma Roddick
I want to pick up on that. As you said, the requirement to attend at least once in 180 days is not particularly onerous. My concern is that, because the requirement is not a high bar for somebody who is physically and mentally able and does not have caring responsibilities, it is likely that the only people you would catch with the provision would be those with good reasons for not attending, and they would then have to share those good reasons with colleagues who were in political opposition to them. Do you agree that that is a possibility?