►
From YouTube: Debate: Scottish Parliament (Assistance for Political Parties) Bill - 10 September 2020
Description
Debate: Scottish Parliament (Assistance for Political Parties) Bill
A
Colleagues,
the
next
item
of
business
is
a
stage
one
committee
bill
debate
on
motion
22651
in
the
name
of
bill
kidd
in
the
scottish
parliament
assistance
for
political
parties
bill.
Can
I
invite
all
those
members
who
wish
to
take
part
in
the
debate
to
press
the
request
to
speak
buttons
now,
and
can
I
invite
bill
kidd
convener
to
speak
and
move
the
motion
on
behalf
of
the
committee?
Okay,.
B
Thank
you
very
much,
president
officer.
Back
in
february,
the
parliament
agreed
to
the
standards,
procedures
and
public
appointments
committee's
proposal
for
a
committee
bill
which
would
amend
the
scotland
act
in
order
to
transfer
responsibility
for
setting
the
terms
of
the
funding
of
non-government
political
parties
from
the
scottish
government
to
the
scottish
parliamentary
corporate
body.
The
bill
and
its
accompanying
documents
were
introduced
on
the
24th
of
june,
and
I'm
very
pleased
to
be
here
in
the
chamber
today
to
invite
the
parliament
to
agree
to
the
bill's
general
principles.
B
The
bill
aims
to
make
an
administrative
change
to
the
way
so-called
short
money
payments
are
determined,
and
today's
arrangements
originate
from
payments
introduced
by
the
harlem
wilson
government
in
1974
to
enable
opposition
parties
to
fulfill
parliamentary
functions
after
devolution,
scotland
act,
1998,
included
provision
for
an
equivalent
scheme,
and
so
short
money
has
been
part
of
devolved
arrangements
from
day.
One
generally
opposition
parties
at
the
scottish
parliament
receive
payments
under
the
terms
of
the
current
scheme.
B
Although
there
are
some
coalition
scenarios
in
which
junior
parties
and
government
can
receive
some
payments
under
the
current
arrangements
for
funding
political
parties,
payments
are
made
according
to
a
scheme
which
is
set
out
in
an
order
in
council
made
under
power
set
out
in
the
scotland
act.
1998.
B
these
powers
have
only
been
used
once
an
order
was
made
in
1999
and
has
governed
the
arrangement
since
the
creation
of
the
parliament.
It
was
prepared
jointly
by
the
uk
government
and
the
then
scottish
executive,
but
the
scotland
act,
2016
removed
the
uk
government's
role,
leaving
scottish
ministers
solely
responsible
for
submitting
draft
orders
to
her
majesty.
B
So,
while
the
scheme
has
always
been
and
continues
to
be
administered
and
funded
by
the
scottish
parliamentary
body
in
the
same
way
as
member
salaries,
allowances
and
pensions
are,
the
corporate
body
does
not
have
the
ability
to
alter
the
formula
that
determines
the
level
of
funding
provided
and
who
is
eligible
to
receive
it.
The
committee
considered
that
the
scottish
government,
as
the
party
or
parties
of
power,
was
not
ideally
placed
to
determine
the
funding
of
the
other
political
parties
represented
in
the
parliament.
The
spcb.
B
By
contrast,
consists
of
msps
elected
by
the
whole
parliament
and
acts
in
a
politically
neutral
manner,
as
such,
we
believe
is
better
place
to
propose
any
alterations
in
respect
of
the
funding
of
non-government
parties,
which
would
always
be
subject
to
agreement
by
the
parliament
as
a
whole.
Under
the
bill,
responsibility
for
setting
the
terms
of
the
short
money
arrangements
are
transferred
from
scottish
ministers
to
the
parliament.
B
Back
at
the
proposal
stage.
I
reassured
members
that
the
proposed
bill
was
narrow
in
scope
and
do
so
again
today
in
this
debate
on
its
general
principles.
Well,
the
bill
transfers
responsibility
for
setting
the
terms
of
any
future
funding
scheme
from
scottish
ministers
to
the
parliament.
It
does
not
interfere
with
the
existing
scheme
and
formula.
This
will
remain
in
place
until
such
time
as
the
parliament
agrees
to
change
it
by
means
of
a
formal
resolution
process.
As
such,
the
passage
of
this
bill
will
not
in
itself
affect
the
amount
paid
two
parties.
B
It's
envisioned
that
the
spcb
and
drawing
up
a
new
scheme
will
consult
before
submitting
it
for
formal
approval
by
the
whole
parliament.
In
this
way,
any
alteration
to
the
amount
of
support
available
to
eligible
parties
or
any
change
to
the
rules
and
eligibility
would
be
determined
by
all
msps
in
drawing
up
plans
to
introduce
this
bill.
The
committee
consulted
with
msps
political
parties,
the
parliamentary
bureau,
the
scottish
government
and
the
electoral
commission.
The
responses
published
on
the
committee's
website
were
supportive
of
the
policy
significantly.
B
The
scottish
government
has
indicated
that
it
is
content
that
its
responsibility
in
this
area
be
transferred
to
the
scottish
parliamentary
corporate
body.
To
summarize
the
general
principles
of
the
bill,
it
transfers
responsibility
for
setting
the
terms
of
funding
for
opposition
parties
from
scottish
ministers
to
the
parliament.
The
current
order,
which
determines
the
current
formula,
will
remain
in
place
unless
and
until
the
parliament
as
a
whole
agrees
to
a
change.
B
C
Thank
you,
presiding
officer,
and
it
doesn't
seem
that
long
ago
we
were
debating
the
bill
in
this
chamber
with
the
proposal
debate,
and
I
would
first
of
all
like
to
thank
as
bill
kidd
as
the
committee
and
the
supporting
staff
for
their
continued
work
on
the
bill.
In
my
last
contribution
side
notice,
I
mentioned
that
the
last
time
this
parliament
discussed
what
we
commonly
refer
to
as
shirt
money
was
the
2nd
of
june
1999.
C
Indeed,
it
was
one
of
the
first
debates
that
the
newly
established
parliament
had.
The
debate
itself,
of
course,
was
intended
to
be
about
modifications
to
both
schedule.
Four
and
five
of
the
scotland
act
1998,
but
the
discussion
was
dominated
by
the
subject
of
short
money,
and
it's
strange
as
we're
needing
the
end
of
session
five
that
we
return
to
this
subject.
So
in
1999,
the
debate
was
more
about
the
allocation
of
money,
but
this
bill
is
more
straightforward.
C
The
corporate
body
oversight
of
the
financial
assistance
will
murder
to
a
great
extent
what
the
corporate
body
does,
with
salaries
and
with
expenses.
As
I
said
at
present,
and
indeed
since
parliament
was
established,
it's
the
corporate
body
that
been
meeting
all
the
costs
associated
with
the
short
money
scheme.
The
funding,
as
we've
heard
from
bill
kidd,
is
based
on
a
formula
and
that
amount
is
currently
set
at
8926
pounds
per
member
of
the
qualifying
party
group
in
terms
of
accountability.
C
At
the
end
of
each
year,
all
parties
and
receive
the
funding
are
required
to
provide
an
audit
certificate
signed
by
an
independent
audit
professional,
which
then
is
published
on
the
parliament's
website,
confirming
that
the
amount
spent
has
been
for
parliamentary
purposes
and
parliamentary
purposes
alone.
This
order
in
council,
the
ordering
council
providing
for
the
existing
scheme
has
been
in
place
since
1999
previously.
C
If
any
changes
were
to
be
made
to
the
arrangements,
such
an
order
would
have
required
approval
by
both
westminster
and
hollywood
before
being
made
by
her
majesty,
the
scotland
act,
2016
changed
these
arrangements
and
approval
by
westminster
is
no
longer
required.
Only
the
scottish
parliament
needs
to
prove
a
short
money
order.
C
However,
the
corporate
body
considers
that
the
arrangements
provided
for
by
the
19
the
2016
act
are
still
not
wholly
satisfactory
as
the
power
over
the
funding
arrangements
was
transferred
to
scottish
ministers.
As
the
funding
is
provided
by
the
corporate
body,
we
consider
it
as
the
best
place
to
oversee
the
arrangements,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
this
will
be
similar
to
the
corporate
body's
responsibility
for
the
administration
of
member
salaries
and
the
reimbursement
of
expenses
scheme
so
similar
to
msp
salaries
and
spencers.
C
We
do
not
think
appropriate,
as
a
matter
of
principle,
for
the
scottish
government
to
have
the
power
to
determine
funding
to
non-government
political
parties.
The
corporate
body,
by
contrast,
consists
of
representatives
elected
by
all
msps
and
acts
in
a
politically
neutral
manner.
As
such,
it
might
therefore
be
thought
to
be
better
placed
to
take
decisions
and
promote
actions
in
respect
of
the
funding
of
non-government
parties.
The
proposal,
therefore,
is
that
the
corporate
body
should
be
able
to
regulate
the
short
money
provision,
and
I'm
pleased
to
note
that
this
is
supported
by
the
government.
C
It's
important
to
be
clear
that
while
the
corporate
body
funds
the
scheme,
it
is
for
individual
parties
to
determine
how
the
funding
is
used
provided
is
only
used
for
parliamentary
purposes.
As
I
said
earlier,
I'm
very
grateful
to
the
standard
procedure
and
public
appointments
committee
for
the
work.
That's
already
undertaken
this
matter
and
I
hope
the
bill
receives
support
today.
A
D
Thank
you,
presiding
officer.
I
very
much
welcome
the
opportunity
to
take
part
in
this
debate
and
I
propose
to
keep
my
contribution
to
it.
Relatively
short,
my
comments
today
on
behalf
of
the
government
will
be
very
much
in
keeping
with
those
that
I
made
when
parliament
debated
the
relevant
committee
bill
proposal
some
seven
months
ago.
I
suspect
some
other
contributions
will
have
a
familiar
ring
to
them.
D
It
is,
however,
important
to
place
matters
on
the
record
once
again
at
stage
one
of
the
bill's
passage
as
members
are
aware,
the
proposed
committee
bill
to
replace
section
97
of
the
scotland
act
1998
regarding
financial
assistance
to
non-government
party
groups
in
the
parliament
also
referred
to
short
money,
was
introduced
in
the
parliament
on
the
24th
of
june
2020.
The
government's
position
has
always
been
that
it
is
for
the
parliament
to
take
the
lead
on
matters
relevant
to
its
own
operation.
D
A
position,
I'm
pleased
to
say,
was
reinforced
by
the
statutory
framework
provided
for
in
the
scotland
act.
2016.,
the
existing
arrangements,
for
short
monies
appear
to
be
purely
consequential
to
the
need
to
put
in
place
a
range
of
practical
measures.
At
the
start
of
the
evolution,
more
specifically
at
a
point
prior
to
the
parliament
being
operational
and
in
a
position
to
take
on
such
a
role
on
that
basis,
the
government
supports
the
principle
of
parliament
having
direct
responsibility
for
short
money
and
for
that
policy
move
to
be
delivered
via
a
committee
bill.
D
The
proposal
may
be
regarded
as
a
welcome
continuation
of
legislation
promoted
by
the
parliament
to
govern
government's
internal
operation
in
a
more
permanent
manner,
for
example,
the
registration
of
members
interests
or
arrangements
for
the
administration
of
parliamentary
pensions
as
the
convener
outlined,
the
aim
of
the
bill
is
simply
to
transfer
statutory
responsibility
for
setting
the
arrangements
for
short
money
from
scottish
ministers
to
the
scottish
parliamentary
corporate
body.
I
note
the
bill
promoted
by
the
committee
is
admirably
brief.
It
sets
out
a
clean
and
simple
statutory
framework,
which
is
also
to
be
commended.
D
D
Indeed,
such
a
move
places
short
money
on
a
similar
footing
with
the
administration
of
member
salaries
and
the
allowances
scheme.
As
we've
heard,
the
bill
does
not
seek
to
affect
the
amount
paid
to
parties,
make
changes
to
the
existing
scheme
or
alter
the
formula
which
is
applied
for
the
disbursement
of
funds.
Rather,
it
provides
for
the
arrangements
for
short
monies,
including
the
amounts
paid
to
parties
to
in
future,
to
be
determined
by
resolution
of
the
parliament
as
a
whole.
D
D
A
E
Thank
you,
presiding
officer,
as
a
member
of
the
standards
procedures
and
public
appointments
committee,
I'm
pleased
to
be
speaking
in
this
stage.
One
debate
on
the
scottish
parliament
assistance
for
political
parties
bill.
I'm
glad
that
we've
also
only
allocated
a
short
amount
of
time
to
this
debate
this
afternoon,
as
I
hope
it's
one
of
the
least
contentious
pieces
of
legislation
to
come
before
this
parliament,
the
bill
simply
seeks,
as
others
have
said,
to
bring
responsibility
for
setting
the
terms
of
funding
to
registered
political
parties
within
the
responsibility
of
the
scottish
parliament
corporate
body.
E
E
E
Naturally,
on
this
occasion
it
was
vitally
necessary
to
consult
the
other
parties
in
the
commons.
Progress
was
delayed
by
the
second
election
that
year
in
october,
but
one
of
those
deeply
involved
in
the
discussions
throughout
as
chief
whip
of
the
snp
group
of
seven,
then
eleven
was
one
hamish.
What
he
was
very
enthusiastic
about
this
move,
especially
ensuring
that
not
only
seats
in
the
house
were
taken
into
account,
but
votes
cast
for
each
party
at
the
election
were
also
used
in
devising
the
formula.
E
So
to
all
those
listening
and
party
central
offices
in
the
members
block
today,
you
now
know
where
the
origins
of
their
posts
and
their
money
for
them
comes
it's
difficult
to
believe
that
short
money
for
opposition
parties
didn't
exist
earlier
than
the
1970s,
but
there
it
is.
Hence
my
ability
to
correct
the
original
paper
to
a
capital
s
and
my
eagerness
to
speak
on
this
debate
today,
presiding
officer
here,
endeth,
the
history
lesson.
A
F
Thank
you
very
much
indeed
deputy
presiding
officer.
I'm
delighted
that
I
don't
have
to
tear
up
my
speech
and
that
it
is
the
consensual
debate
that
I
thought
it
was
going
to
be.
I
welcome
the
progress
of
the
bill
and
again
give
my
thanks
to
those
involved,
particularly
from
the
committee
and
the
staff
and
as
bill
kidd
has
already
done
he's
laid
out
the
detail
of
the
provision,
so
I
won't
go
over
that
again
when
I
spoke
briefly
during
the
bill's
proposal.
F
F
It
may
serve
as
a
reminder
that
democracy
is
more
than
just
elections.
It
requires
active
and
functioning
opposition
parties,
informed
debate
and
informed
electorate
and
involvement
in
the
wider
processes
of
how
we
are
government
in
a
healthy
democracy.
We
should
be
constantly
reflecting
on
how
to
enhance
and
improve
our
democratic
engagement
and
and
procedures.
F
In
many
ways
not
a
lot
has
changed
since
I
last
spoke
on
the
subject,
as
a
committee
bill,
the
familiar
processes
of
preparing
a
stage.
One
report
for
this
chamber
to
consider
have
been
bypassed.
Much
of
that
scrutiny
engage
and
engagement.
Work
has
already
taken
place,
as
the
committee
outlined
its
proposals.
The
rather
straightforward
clauses
of
the
bill
and
its
documentation
have,
however,
been
examined
by
the
finance
committee,
and
its
call
for
reviews
did
not
receive
any
responses,
and
its
report
reflects
that.
F
This
should
not
be
any
great
surprise
given
as
the
financial
memorandum
notes,
the
costs
from
changing
responsibilities
from
ministers
to
the
corporate
body
are
minimal.
However,
is
right
that
these
processes
take
place
and
that
legislation,
particularly
legislation
amending
our
foundational
statutes,
is
given
the
full
scrutiny
it
deserves.
F
That
being
said,
as
we
introduced
it,
the
standards
committee
has
not
foreseen
any
great
controversy
in
what
has
been
what
we
have
proposed
presiding
officer.
As
the
committee
has
set
out.
This
bill
presents
a
small
but
sensible
change
of
responsibilities.
Consultation
responses
have
welcomed
its
provisions
and
its
principles
have
been
well
received
across
the
parliament.
F
It's
unlikely
that
our
debate
today
will
feature
heavily
in
tomorrow's
newspapers,
but
it
is
welcome
that
this
parliamentary
housekeeping
is
taking
place
and
it's
the
necessary
part
of
what
we
all
do.
I
support
the
bill
and
the
scottish
conservatives
will
be
giving
it
their
backing
again
today,
as
we
have
done
so
in
the
standards
committee.
A
G
Thanks,
president
officer,
can
I
thank
the
convener
of
the
committee
and
dave
sturt
from
the
corporate
body
for
opening
the
debate.
The
funding
of
political
parties
is
very
important
to
the
running
of
our
democracy.
I
think
we
all
recognize
that,
and
if
we
want
a
thriving
parliamentary
democracy,
then
we
have
to
invest
in
it
by
providing
financial
support
for
things
like
research
policy,
development,
stakeholder
engagement,
communications
and
all
that
goes
along
with
the
work
of
political
parties
and
a
functioning,
effective
and
accountable
democracy
costs
money.
G
The
bill,
let's
be
honest,
is
a
pretty
dull
one.
That's
process
driven
dry
bureaucratic.
It's
it's
not
really.
What
gets
us
jumping
out
of
bed
in
the
morning,
but
it
is,
without
doubt
an
important
piece
of
legislation
and
it
will
transfer
that
responsibility
for
the
short
money
from
ministers
to
parliament,
where
it
probably
always
should
have
sat.
In
my
opinion,
we
should
never
see
the
control
over
such
an
important
budget
line
and
the
hands-off
ministers
of
any
political
party.
So
this
spell
is
a
good
move
and
a
democratic
one.
G
It's
effectively
tidying
up
a
hangover,
as
people
have
said,
curing
a
hangover
from
the
pre-scotland
act
era.
Transferring
that
responsibility
to
the
corporate
body.
It
does
not
seek
to
make
changes
to
the
existing
scheme
and
formula
for
the
disbursement
of
funds,
so
it
won't
affect
the
amount
paid
to
parties.
But
for
me
that
is
an
issue.
What
else
is
not
addressed
here?
I
think
it
does
need
to
be
addressed
in
the
longer
term,
because
at
the
moment,
the
governing
party-
and
this
is
not
a
party
political
comment.
This
is
a
comment
at
whoever.
G
That
the
governing
party,
whichever
party
or
parties
that
may
be,
has
a
civil
service,
special
advisers,
legions
of
policy
specialists
and
army
of
press
officers.
Opposition
parties
have
a
few
researchers
and
a
few
press
officers
to
rely
on
and
a
handful
of
staff
to
shadow
all
of
the
work
of
the
civil
service
and
the
government.
G
G
The
formula
hasn't
changed
for
a
very
long
time
and
there's
been
no
recognition
of
the
increased
powers
and
responsibilities
of
this
parliament
that
have
come
over
those
over
that
period
of
time,
which
requires
more
research,
requires
more
advice
and
requires
more
work
and
a
consultation.
So
scottish
labor
supports
the
bill
and
we
hope
it
will
pass
without
any
problems.
G
E
H
Had
since
the
scotland
act
1998,
so
it's
been,
you
know
long
overdue,
that
this
is
corrected,
and
this
is
of
course,
a
very
technical
bill.
It
doesn't
deal
with
the
levels
of
funding
or
the
formula
that's
applied
to
different
political
parties,
but
that
is
a
very
live
issue
and
I
think
you
know
neil
philly's
contribution
and-
and
others
have
perhaps
alluded
to
the
debate-
that's
to
come
if
this
bill
is
passed
and
about
perhaps
potentially
re-examining
that
formula
going
forward.
H
But
that's
not
for
decision
today
today
is
about
hopefully
agreeing
a
bill
that
will
make
that
change
to
the
technicality
of
how
short
money
is,
how
short
money
is
distributed
within
this
parliament.
I
mean
dave.
Stewart
gave
us
a
little
bit
of
the
the
history
of
this
and
maureen.
What
offered
a
really
fascinating
personal
contribution,
personal
history
around
this,
and
I
think
it
it
underlines.
H
Perhaps
maureen's
contribution
underlines
just
how
important
short
money
is,
because
you
know
particularly
for
small
political
parties
that
are
trying
to
find
their
feet
in
institutions
and
trying
to
scrutinize
government
when
government
has
so
much
resources
in
the
form
of
civil
service
and
even
party
staff
working
for
it.
It's
really
important
for
small
parties
to
have
this
financial
support
to
enable
us
to
do
the
work
of
scrutinizing
government
and,
of
course,
back
in
in
the
day
in
the
70s.
H
In
this
case
back
in
february,
when
we
had
that
debate
now,
the
finance
and
constitution
committee
is
jamie.
Alcor
johnson
has
always
already
pointed
out,
has
now
considered
and
reported
on
the
bill's
financial
memorandum.
It
didn't
receive
any
views
on
its.
It
didn't
receive
any
responses
on
its
call
for
views
and
concluded
that
it
had
no
comment
to
make
on
the
financial
memorandum.