Executive Accountability to Parliament

Part of the debate – in the Scottish Parliament at 3:28 pm on 1 November 2000.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of John Swinney John Swinney Scottish National Party 3:28, 1 November 2000

This debate might have been more straightforward if the First Minister—in his first debate as First Minister in this Parliament—had started off by saying that there is some merit in the SNP's amendment, which seeks to ensure that all parties are behind any guidelines. I shall have some substantial things to say about those guidelines in a moment. We could all have been together. If the First Minister's speech had reflected the merit of our amendment, I would have been right behind him; he would have been able to come to me, in confidence, with guidelines; I would have talked about them, would have taken ownership of them on behalf of my party, and would have delivered my party's support for those guidelines—which I would have agreed on a private basis. There would have been no question about it. However, Parliament is being asked, in a debate of an hour and a half, to accept principles that I do not think clarify any of the relationships on which we need clarity.

At the heart of this debate are the legitimate tensions between Parliament and the Executive, which will always exist in any parliamentary democracy. I am determined to ensure that whatever arrangements are put in place last not just for four years, but for a great deal longer, and that they give Parliament its proper position, so that when we are on the benches that Labour members occupy now, they are on our benches and we are running this Parliament—that time is not far away—the Labour party will have the protection of the rules that all of us will have worked on together and that command the support of us all.