Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 18 February 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 890 contributions

|

Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]

UEFA European Championship (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 11 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

I welcome the fact that there is clear agreement across the committee and the Government on the need to draw a distinction between commercial activity and social or political expression. I welcome George Adam’s amendments and the Government’s support for them.

Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]

Legal Mechanism for any Independence Referendum

Meeting date: 11 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

Good morning. In previous sessions in our inquiry, we have ended up in a conversation about whether particular ideas, such as the referendum being “once in a generation” and the settled will of the Scottish people, are merely political rhetoric or whether they have any substance as principles that can be relied on.

I want to explore that question in relation to the point that several of the witnesses today have made, that everyone accepts that it is the right of the people of Scotland to make a decision about their future. Several witnesses have mentioned that there is consensus on that, and that consensus was written down as recently as the Smith commission, when all five political parties that were involved, and both Governments, accepted that. Well, the commission phrased it by saying,

“nothing in this report prevents Scotland becoming an independent country in the future should the people of Scotland so choose”,

which is a little more nuanced, but it clearly frames that right as sitting with the people of Scotland and not with anybody else.

Is that simply a piece of political rhetoric that just happens not to have been contested by the political parties that are prominent at the moment? Alternatively, does it have any status as a principle in the UK’s unwritten constitution? Is it something that can be relied on in any sense? I am aware that I am asking that at a time when there is a genuine threat that a UK Government could be led by a far-right party, which we should be afraid of for many reasons, including because it was not involved in that process and would presumably argue that it cannot be bound by a principle that was agreed by other political parties.

Is there any sense in which the UK Government’s acceptance of that principle has status and can be relied on, or is it as much rhetoric as talking about “once in a generation” is?

Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]

Legal Mechanism for any Independence Referendum

Meeting date: 11 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

Do any other witnesses want to comment on the extent to which the principle that Scotland has the right to make the decision could be relied on in circumstances in which a political party that disagrees with it comes to power in the UK?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

I do not want to step on their toes.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

Thank you.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

I think that other members will come on to enforcement and compliance later.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

Is that four-nations dialogue purely among your professional colleagues, or are you aware of that happening between Governments, too?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

Remmy Jones, do you have anything to add?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

My question is about the consistency of regulation. On the question of consistency between different parts of the UK, one view is that we should generally err on the side of consistency and regulatory alignment, because that is simpler to communicate, it is easier for everyone to understand and it avoids unintended consequences in relation to the movement of people between different jurisdictions for one reason or another. Another view is that it is not good to prioritise alignment for its own sake, and that we should align with something only if we think that it is the right regulatory position. According to that view, we should not adopt a lower regulatory position just for the sake of alignment.

On where such regulatory decisions should sit, there is again a view that, in relation to devolved matters, the devolved Government and Parliament should decide whether divergence is justified to achieve a public policy objective such as patient safety. Another view, which is embodied in the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, is that the UK Government should decide, in the interests of market alignment and fairness for market operators, to impose a common approach.

What are your general views on, first, whether alignment between the different jurisdictions in the UK is important? Does it matter? Are there any unintended consequences of such alignment? Secondly, to what extent is the level of divergence or difference that is proposed in this legislation workable and manageable?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Patrick Harvie

Are there any other views?