On a point of order, Deputy Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance on how parliamentary process can be correctly followed to secure answers on the £11,000 Michael Matheson iPad scandal. On behalf of our constituents, we have tried repeatedly to get answers from the Government and the Parliament but, since last Thursday, we have been frustrated at every turn.
Mr Matheson has referred himself to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, but yesterday the self-same body said that no such process exists. Topical questions have been rejected. Urgent questions have been refused. Debate requests have been dismissed. A request for a further statement received the response that such a statement would be inadmissible, and all the while, the facts keep changing.
The lesson from all great political scandals is that the cover-up is often worse than the crime. It is now abundantly clear that the Scottish National Party is in an industrial cover-up and is closing ranks to avoid the truth getting out.
We have it on record that the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care have all misled the Parliament in recent times, but nothing has happened—no corrections, no apologies and no proper investigations. I cannot understand how that meets the obligations of our standing orders, which ensure that the code of conduct is followed by members, regardless of how senior their position is in Government.
To our constituents watching at home, the Parliament appears to be totally toothless, whether on the iPad scandal or the deleted WhatsApp messages. Words and standards apparently count for nothing for the SNP Government.
The health secretary has been accused by journalists of lying to the Scottish press. Members and the Scottish public deserve to know the truth of that charge, but, sadly, it is increasingly clear that the Scottish ministers are hiding behind the Parliament’s rigid rules and inflexible timetabling to evade investigation and interrogation.
In summary, Deputy Presiding Officer, I seek your guidance on how the Parliament can compel the evasive and scandal-hit health secretary to answer key questions on an issue that has rightly enraged our constituents and the entire country.
Thank you, Mr Hoy.
In response to the point that you have raised in relation to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, it has indicated that self-referral is not possible, but it has also indicated that it is due to meet tomorrow to consider the matter further and it will issue a statement following that meeting.
On the code of conduct, as you will know, that is a matter that is agreed by Parliament, but it is for the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee to consider and report on the adoption, amendment and application of any code of conduct for members. Any revisions to that have to be agreed by Parliament on the basis of recommendations from the committee. Therefore, if you have concerns, you may wish to consider writing to the convener of that committee.
As you will know, the business of the Parliament is agreed at the Parliamentary Bureau. You may wish to consider speaking to your business manager about that. When a business motion is brought before the Parliament, as will be amply demonstrated shortly, there is an opportunity to speak against it.
Air ais
HousingAir adhart
Business Motion