SPCB Written Question · S2W-22793 · Session 2
Whether the lack of any mechanism to correct factual errors in draft reports by the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner breaches …
The question
To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether the lack of any mechanism to correct factual errors in draft reports by the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner breaches the European Convention on Human Rights or Scots Law.
The answer
The member is referred to the answer to question S2W-22792.
In terms of section 9(3) of the 2002 act where the Commissioner concludes that a member has breached a provision, before sending the report to the Standards and Public Appointments Committee, a member must be given a copy of the Commissioner’s draft and may make representations which, if the are not given effect to in the report, will be annexed to it. The Standards and Public Appointments Committee cannot alter or amend a Commissioner’s report after it is received but in terms of the Code of Conduct (paragraph10.2.31) it will ask the member who is subject to the complaint to confirm in writing whether he/she agrees with the Commissioner’s findings in fact or conclusion. It will also ask if the member wishes to make representations to the committee.
The committee considers the report provided and any representation from the member before deciding if it agrees with the Commissioner’s findings in fact and conclusion. It can also carry out its own investigation or refer matters back to the Commissioner for further investigation. Further, Section 10 of the 2002 act specifically provides that the Parliament is not bound by the facts found or the conclusions reached by the Commissioner. There are ample opportunities for factual errors to be brought to the attention of the Committee before it concludes its deliberations. To that extent, the ability to comment on factual errors in an initial draft adds little to the overall process.
For the reasons set out in relation to the earlier linked question number S2W-22792, we are satisfied that there is no breach of the European Convention on Human Rights or Scots Law.
In terms of section 9(3) of the 2002 act where the Commissioner concludes that a member has breached a provision, before sending the report to the Standards and Public Appointments Committee, a member must be given a copy of the Commissioner’s draft and may make representations which, if the are not given effect to in the report, will be annexed to it. The Standards and Public Appointments Committee cannot alter or amend a Commissioner’s report after it is received but in terms of the Code of Conduct (paragraph10.2.31) it will ask the member who is subject to the complaint to confirm in writing whether he/she agrees with the Commissioner’s findings in fact or conclusion. It will also ask if the member wishes to make representations to the committee.
The committee considers the report provided and any representation from the member before deciding if it agrees with the Commissioner’s findings in fact and conclusion. It can also carry out its own investigation or refer matters back to the Commissioner for further investigation. Further, Section 10 of the 2002 act specifically provides that the Parliament is not bound by the facts found or the conclusions reached by the Commissioner. There are ample opportunities for factual errors to be brought to the attention of the Committee before it concludes its deliberations. To that extent, the ability to comment on factual errors in an initial draft adds little to the overall process.
For the reasons set out in relation to the earlier linked question number S2W-22792, we are satisfied that there is no breach of the European Convention on Human Rights or Scots Law.
In the Official Report
No contribution in the Official Report cites S2W-22793 by reference.