How to fix Hollyrood – Meghan Gallacher MSP

Last year, the Scottish Parliament celebrated its 25th anniversary.

A significant milestone indeed but, sadly, a quarter of a century on, there is one problem; Holyrood has become completely out of touch.

By the end of this Parliamentary term, we will have witnessed a mass exodus of experienced MSPs from across the political divide.

The problem with the way the Scottish Parliament functions is that the business schedule is mundane, scripted and lacks the levers for opposition parties to truly hold the Government to account.

Some people will ask why the functionality of the Scottish Parliament matters but people rightly care about how their money is spent and whether decisions taken will affect them and their families.

If MSPs cannot scrutinise a government effectively, it ultimately leads to the conundrum of whether people have faith in the democratic processes of our country.

Since the SNP achieved a majority government in 2011, and with subsequent minority governments largely being propped up by the Greens, they have managed to monopolise the political processes and in turn, have caused damage to the reputation of devolved governance.

This is well documented through Humza Yousaf’s Hate Crime Bill, Nicola Sturgeon’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill and the continued ferries fiasco.

Take First Minister’s Questions for example. Questions must be submitted early in the week before the noon session on Thursday. You can opt to press your button on the day for constituency matters, however, with only 45 minutes and 128 fellow MSPs to battle with, it is akin to a lottery draw.

Then there’s the committee structure. Committees are so bogged down scrutinising Government Bills, there is little time for the committee to focus on any other inquiries or workload that members of the public would prefer us to focus on.

Being an opposition MSP, you are at the behest of Government Ministers and routinely scheduled question sessions – if you are lucky to be selected to ask a question to raise an issue on portfolio matters, only to be given a scripted answer, drafted by Government special advisers.

But those issues only scrape the surface of the established status quo that has plagued Holyrood since its creation.

Timed speeches and strict debating times mean that MSPs are guilty of writing full scripts to fill their allocated time, meaning fewer opportunities for interventions to allow a full and meaningful debate.

This of course, differs significantly to Westminster where debates are freer flowing, and MPs don’t feel the need to spend a full five minutes talking about a subject that they can cover in a lesser wordcount.

This is why the quality and calibre of speeches are much better – as they are not read out word for word and members speak truly from their convictions and a place of principle.

There have been many attempts to change the running order of the Scottish Parliament in recent years. Suggestions such as calls for more elected MSPs, fewer Government Ministers and expanding capacity were voiced through a Commission on Parliamentary reform in 2017, although I don’t believe increasing the number of MSPs would solve the problem.

Perhaps it would create further confusion to the public, many of whom remain unaware 25 years on they have one constituency MSP and eight list MSPs per region.

Aside from the internal structures, there is also a cultural issue.

The Scottish Parliament was designed to ensure that no party could rule with an iron fist. Yet in recent times we have witnessed the SNP ruthlessly use the Parliament to their advantage to shut down debate and freeze out opposition parties.

This goes against the cross-party working that Holyrood was designed to encourage.

On the point of cross-party working, in recent times, this has been non-existent. Committees that should promote collegiate working to scrutinise the work of the government tend to result in MSPs following the party line. This is problematic as reports published favour the government position, despite the need to highlight matters raised through committee evidence.

Currently, MSPs are submitting their views to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments committee as they are currently scrutinising committee effectiveness. This piece of work has sparked my interest and might be the first step to improving the functionality of the Scottish Parliament, to make it truly work for the people who send us there.

But the work cannot stop there. Devolution has so much to offer Scotland should parliamentary processes work effectively. With the next Scottish Parliamentary election a mere 13 months away, perhaps there is a chance to do things differently, to break the chains and create a Parliamentary structure and ensure it is one that does not shy away from scrutiny.