On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I want to raise a point of order in relation to First Minister’s question time today.
During his questioning, Douglas Ross mentioned a case of people from Fife—a postmistress, Mary, and her daughter Myra. At the start of his question, he talked about the obligation—as he feels it to be—on the Lord Advocate to come forward with a process for quashing the convictions, and he finished his question with the demand that convictions be overturned. The example that he gave was a harrowing one. It involved Mary, who was wrongly suspended from her job in the Auchtermuchty post office, with a devastating impact on her family—her daughter Myra, in particular. He mentioned that Mary died before the Horizon scandal came to light and, as he said, she died without knowing or its being proved that she was right. That is a tragedy and a harrowing story.
Douglas Ross then made demands for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to overturn those wrongful convictions, and he also said that there had been no prosecution or conviction in the case. Surely it is important, when the Parliament discusses such issues and decides on them, that we know where accountability lies. In that case, accountability clearly lies with the Post Office, whose egregious actions caused distress to that family and many others, and with United Kingdom ministers, but not with the Crown Office.
Does the Presiding Officer agree that we should be very clear about where accountability lies when we make such demands in Parliament?
I thank Mr Brown for his contribution.
The content of members’ contributions is not ordinarily a matter for the chair. Therefore, that is not a matter that I will rule on. Members will be well aware of the need to ensure that comments are accurate. Wherever there are any inaccuracies, members will be very well aware, at this point in the session, of the mechanism that exists to correct them.
Air adhart
Decision Time