���˿���

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft] Business until 17:15

Meeting date: Tuesday, April 29, 2025

Official Report 876KB pdf

Points of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your direction and some information from you. This morning at just after 10 past 11, Colin Mackay of STV News put a post on X announcing that oil refining had ceased at Grangemouth, marking the end of oil refining in Scotland. That development was not announced by the company. It was not announced to Parliament. It did not come in a ministerial statement or in a debate. It came in a media leak. I feel that that is a discourtesy to this Parliament. It is deeply disrespectful to treat the workers, families and communities who rely on Grangemouth in that way, and I would go as far as to say that it is quite an insulting way for them to learn such important news.

I am aware that a request has already been made through the Parliamentary Bureau, which met at noon, for both a statement and a debate on the future of Grangemouth. However, this is clearly a fast-moving situation, and given that the information came to light only after 11 o’clock—too late for an urgent question on it to be lodged—I ask you whether you have had any approach from the Scottish Government to provide a statement later this afternoon or tomorrow on this critical matter.

It is vital that Parliament receives an immediate update from ministers. In particular, there are important questions that require to be answered. Has Petroineos given any firm commitment to the redevelopment of the Grangemouth site? Has the company indicated any willingness to invest in any of the nine potential projects that have been identified? Does the Scottish Government still view Petroineos, in the light of this leaked news, as a company that is acting in good faith with respect to the future of the site?

Presiding Officer, the people of Grangemouth deserve clarity, the Parliament deserves respect, and the Government must be held accountable. I would therefore be very grateful for your guidance on how a statement could be secured as a matter of urgency, if not today, then tomorrow.

Thank you, Mr Kerr. I am not aware from whence the information that was reported on social media came, so I cannot comment on that. However, the Minister for Parliamentary Business is liaising with business managers with regard to a statement being made to this chamber in the immediate future. That is my understanding.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. As you will be aware, on Thursday 24 April, I and other members of this Parliament were in attendance for portfolio questions on education. Members were there to ask questions on school violence, vaping in schools, parents being unable to access childcare, job losses at universities, teacher recruitment and care-experienced children. Those are all important and serious matters for our children and young people, parents and those who work in our schools, colleges and universities.

While I and many other members were in attendance, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills was unfortunately not here to address those important questions. For context, Presiding Officer, I note that that question time took place hours after a serious incident at an Aberdeen school and in the week before pupils start their Scottish Qualifications Authority exams.

A spokesperson for the cabinet secretary told the press that she

“had a mix of government and party meetings and events in the course of the day”.

A source later confirmed that the non-attendance here was

“not due to government business”.

No extenuating circumstances, justifiable reasons or apologies have been given for the no-show. Not only does it set a bad example to Scotland’s schoolchildren for the cabinet secretary to skip education questions, which were presumably in the ministerial diary for weeks if not months but, worse than that, it appears that Jenny Gilruth may have prioritised party interests over her responsibilities to Parliament and, by extension, the country.

I make this point of order because it is important that the cabinet secretary is afforded an opportunity to clarify her reasons for not attending her portfolio question time, alongside making available her diary and any changes to it, so that we can ascertain when Government and party business took place and where. Failure to do that can only create the impression that the cabinet secretary has been discourteous and disrespectful to this Parliament.

The Nolan principles of public life are clear. They underpin our standing orders and the ministerial code, which states, at subparagraph 1.4(d), under the “Accountability” principle:

“Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny necessary to ensure this.”

Presiding Officer, can you confirm that, under rules 13.1 and 13.2 of our standing orders, the cabinet secretary can be afforded an opportunity to make a statement in order to issue a clarification—alongside the publication of her diary—or make an apology to you and the Parliament, because the Parliament cannot and should not simply accept the situation of ministers putting party interests before those of the country?

Thank you, Mr Bibby. Our standing orders advise that

“oral questions may be answered by any member of the Scottish Government or a junior ... Minister.”

It is a matter for the Scottish Government to decide who to put forward for a particular session. In the first instance, the ministerial code is a matter for the First Minister.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The business of Parliament is to look after our citizens, including, most importantly, our children. Last week, during education portfolio questions, I asked what support is available to teachers who face violence—a vital question, following the stabbing of a 12-year-old girl. Students across the country—not just in Aberdeen—were shocked and terrified, as were parents, yet, at about that time, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills chose to attend a Scottish National Party photo call rather than attend the chamber to answer questions. That was not a diary clash but a deliberate choice. Violence in schools is rising; pupils and staff are scared; and that deserves the full attention of the education secretary.

I ask that the cabinet secretary apologise to the students, parents and teachers for a failure to answer those questions. Will the Presiding Officer be able to investigate the circumstances surrounding Jenny Gilruth’s feeling that stabbings in schools are not important enough for her to appear before the Parliament? What recourse does the Presiding Officer have to address the issue?

Thank you, Dr Gulhane. As Presiding Officer, it is my role to enforce the standing orders of the Parliament. With regard to the particular instance to which the member refers, rule 13.7.1 advises that

“oral questions may be answered by any member of the Scottish Government or a junior ... Minister.”

I say again that the matter is for the Government, and, as I said previously, the ministerial code is a matter for the First Minister in the first instance.