Iain Gray, leader of labour MSPs in the Scottish Parliament, opened the questions as is his privilege for being the biggest party in opposition.
Diageo was the subject of most questions, which was to be expected and Mr Gray accused the Scottish government of letting down the Diageo workforce because the First Minister had taken part in a protest in Kilmarnock against the job cuts. Alex Salmond staunchly defended his and all the government's participation in the protests. For his second question (after the political ramblings) he accused the government of using civil service time to compose proposals for the National Conversation instead of dedicating all government time to the continual jobs loses over Scotland. Mr Salmond, rather patiently, explained to Iain Gray that civil servants are employed to do the bidding of the government, then he proceeded to outline other companies which had received assistance from them, with varying degrees of success.
Onto Ms Goldie who was beating the drum about 'second chance schools', the new tory policy brought into the public arena earlier this week. These are schools for those children who are disruptive and excluded from schools. The FM gave a list of projects which already deal with these children and I would have thought it far better all these agencies started to worked together more to resolve the issue rather than propose another tier of authority. However, I doubt if we've heard the end of this idea, so be prepared for more meat on the bones in the future.
Tavish Scott questioned the quantity (not quality) of the attention given to Diageo in comparison with other companies where the government has intervened. A good question and answered with seriousness by the FM, who stated examples of government intervention in creating and preserving jobs in recent times.
Unfortunately, owing to the lack of brevity with opposition questions, there was no time for back benchers questions. The Presiding Officer declared he would be looking into methods to curtail long speeches from opposition parties and I suspect he started the task with immediate effect.
A lively and informative half hour with all main players on form.
Posts
6 comments:
Subrosa
The length that the opposition parties leaders take up is a direct result of The presiding Officer not doing his job.
The session is called "questions to the first minister" it has turned into party political broadcasts with a pretty lame question added on the end.
All the PO has to do is say, if there is no question in there we will move on.
If he cannot run FMQ he should not be there.
Fergusson's had this problem before Dubbie and I don't think he's strong enough. Hopefully, if he sees the playback of the half hour, he will realise he needs to take urgent action.
I agree Dubbieside. The questions have become long and rambling and, as you say, party political broadcasts free of charge, albeit to a fairly small audience.
The PO should allow only a question, not a 5 minute preable. (Especially with Iain Gray; that man could bore for Scotland.) He should also insist that the FM answer the question, and not ramble on about the government's many achievements.
All FM's boast about achievements tris, Jack McConnell being the most guilty imo.
Having watched the broadcast I notice that the session was stopped at 1230hrs precisely with resumption of busines timed for 1415hrs. An almost 2 hour lunch!
When I am engaged in a project and I run out of time I add on time and cut short my breaks. It seems to me the lack of flexibility in the minds of politicians is matched by their greed and lack of flexibility in their breaks and holidays etc.
The spectacle of Mathers tapping his watch during the McAskil statement when we saw the Parliament recalled for, 1 hour was quite odious given the state of affairs of the country, and the subject in hand.
I'm afraid I am disgusted with politicians od all parties. They live of the fat of the land, whilst all around them despair, they need a step change in their attitudes.
Cameron seems to have got a handle on it with his promise to reduce their perks and income and cull their numbers, we are over governed and their are to many snouts at the trough, it is time for the farmer to get his gun.
KbW, what I can't understand is why Fergusson didn't let it over-run timewise so as back benchers could have their say.
Surely that would have pulled them all up quickly by shortening their lunch times?
Like you politicians seem to be laws unto themselves rather than representatives of the people.
Post a Comment