 Ac rydw i'n cael ei wneud, rydw i'n gweithio i ysgolio'r ysgrifennu COVID-19 yn gyd? Arna yn cael eu cyfrifio'n cyfrifio ar gyfer y cwmbr oedd yn rhywbethol iawn i gyfnodol'r halyridd. Yn y mertyn ysgolio'r ysgolio, mae yma'n cyd-1 yn ei ddigydd yn ym 8-3-8-1-8, yn y ffawr George Adam, o'r ysgolio'r Llywodraeth Llywodraeth i'r ystod yn cyfnodol iawn, yma, I've heard that these individuals are, under the law, very much towards the Government's response to, but I'm happy with this! Thank you all, Presiding Officer. I begin by thanking the Standards Procedures and Public Appointments Committee and the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee for their scrutiny of the bill. It's progressing at an expedited timetable, and I'm grateful to both committees for their careful considerations on this matter. In 2020, this Parliament agreed by it to be a substantial extension of voting and candidacy rights in relation to the Scottish Parliament and local government elections. All foreign nationals with any form of leave to remain were granted voting rights. This was an important signal, welcoming all those who choose to make Scotland their home. While the right to stand in the Scottish Parliament and local government elections were also extended, this was limited to those foreign nationals with indefinite leave to remain in the UK. For EU nationals, the new law ensured that all those with settled status or pre-settled status could stand in Scottish devolved elections. However, people with limited leave to remain, for example, the right to remain in the UK for a 30-month period cannot stand in Scottish devolved elections. That bill responds to four treaties that the UK Government has agreed in relation to voting and candidacy rights in local government elections. Those treaties have been agreed with Portugal, Luxembourg, Spain and Poland. They seek to allow nationals of those countries to vote and stand in UK elections on the same basis as UK citizens. The treaties also provide that UK citizens can vote and stand for elections in local government elections in the country's subject to the treaties. The bill before Parliament today is tightly focused on the treaties. Because our law on voting rights is already one of the most generous in the world, no change is needed in that area. The bill is therefore restricted to ensuring compliance with the treaties in relation to candidacy rights. The bill will extend local government candidacy rights to any nationals of Portugal, Luxembourg, Spain and Poland. They have a limited form of leave to remain in the UK. I should stress that the EU nationals that settled and presettled and presettled status already have candidacy rights in our election, so the extension here is unlikely to affect a substantial number of people. The bill will also ensure that law can be updated if and when additional treaties are signed or if existing ones are cancelled. The Yellow Delegated Powers Committee has suggested a change to the bill to make it clear that, if a treaty is cancelled, ministers will oblige to remove those rights. I will consider that point further ahead of stage 2. Because the bill is focused upon compliance with treaties, it does not seek to make wider changes to electoral law on candidacy. It does not affect countries where a treaty has not been agreed and does not apply to Scottish Parliament elections. However, the Government has ambitions to extend candidacy rights further. We are committed to a shared policy programme last year to develop legislation on electoral reform to enable more people to stand as candidates at the Scottish Parliament and local Government elections. My intention is for this to look at issues surrounding a wider expansion of candidacy rights, for example, to all foreign nationals with limited leave to remain or to 16 and 17-year-olds. I plan to consult later in this year on the issue alongside a number of other electoral reform proposals. The proposal would be to bring legislation at a later date to the Parliament. As I continue with the interactions with the committee, I have noted on a number of occasions that proposal seems to get larger and larger as we discuss it further. I am open to many of the ideas that individuals might have here today with regard to the idea of electoral reform in Scotland. In conclusion, I thank the Standards and Delegated Powers Committee for their consideration of the bill. I look forward to this afternoon's debate. I move the motion in my name to ask the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Scottish local government election candidacy rights of foreign nationals bill. I now call on Martin Whitfield to speak on behalf of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee around six minutes. I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer, and it is a pleasure to follow George Adam in respect of this matter. The purposes of the bill is because, of course, prior to the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union on 31 January 2020, all EU nationals who were resident in the United Kingdom could stand as candidates in United Kingdom local elections. Currently, British nationals, Commonwealth citizens and citizens of the Republic of Ireland can stand as candidates at local government elections in Scotland. In addition, as mentioned, the Scottish elections, Franchise and Representation Act of 2020 allowed qualifying foreign nationals, individuals who did not require leave under the Immigration Act 1971, to enter or indeed remain in the UK, or if they did require such leave, have indefinitely to remain on pre-settled status to stand at the Scottish Parliament and local government elections in Scotland. Thus, EU citizens who have settled or pre-settled status are already able to stand at local government elections and Scottish Parliament elections in Scotland. The purpose of this bill is to allow a further category of individuals to stand for election, be elected and hold office as members of a local authority in Scotland. Those are the nationals of any country with which the UK has a mutual candidacy right at local elections as a result of a treaty. The provisions in the bill will ensure compliance with treaties that the UK Government has agreed to in relation to voting and candidacy rights in local government elections, notably with Portugal, Luxembourg, Spain and Poland, albeit that some of these treaties are yet to come in force as they await in part. This bill has become law. The bilateral agreements that the UK has entered into with Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain will, when in force, grant the nationals of those countries who are legally resident in the United Kingdom the right to stand as candidates at local elections, subject to the same conditions and disqualifications that apply to nationals of the United Kingdom. The method of achieving this change for those of constitutional interest is by making a limited amendment to section 29 of the Local Government Scotland Act 1973, which sets out the eligibility requirements for nomination, election and holding office as a member of a local authority in Scotland. Section 29 of the 1973 Act currently allows qualifying foreign nationals to stand as candidates at Scottish local government elections. The category covers foreign nationals other than Commonwealth citizens or citizens of the Republic of Ireland, who either do or do not require leave under the Immigration Act 1971 to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, or if they do require such leave, have indefinite leave to remain on pre-settled status. It therefore includes any nationals of Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain who have settled or pre-settled status. The Bill extends section 29 of the 1973 Act to confer the candidacy rights on those nationals who hold lawful immigration status in the United Kingdom. As was explained at the committee by those who opened this debate, at present all foreign nationals, with any form of leave to remain in the United Kingdom, can vote in Scottish local government elections, but the candidacy rights are limited to people with indefinite leave to remain or pre-settled status. There is an anticipation that most European Union nationals who are currently resident in Scotland already have these candidacy rights. Voting rights were conferred by virtue of section 1 of the Scottish Tish Elections franchise and representation act 2020. The committee notes the delegated powers and law reform committee's report on the Bill and is satisfied by the explanation provided by the Minister that the Scottish Government still considers that it would be required to amend the list of countries to properly reflect international treaty obligations and ensure that there is no unfair advantage in relation to candidacy rights. However, the committee recognises the points made by the delegated powers and law reform committee that a future government might not consider itself bound to remove a country and that the Scottish ministers might exercise discretion in relation to the timing of such removal from schedule 6A. The committee therefore supported the DPLRC's call for the Scottish Government to bring forward an amendment at stage 2 to address this issue and I welcome the comments given today and indeed assurances and correspondence that this will be looked at prior to stage 2, although I extend slight concern in the caveat that was attached to the written response that the government is of the feeling that this current government and future governments would be bound in the same way. The committee also recognised that in the unlikely scenario would arise whereby a by-election occurs as a result of a foreign national who had been elected as a councillor standing down because they're required to leave the country and it remains a small but we believe relevant possibility and the committee echoes its call on the Scottish government to continue dialogue with local authorities so that it is aware of the potential for additional funding for elections in this case and that there is a greater need for by-elections than is anticipated because of individuals being elected with the limited leave to remain. The committee's view supports the principal purpose of the Scottish local government election candidacy rights for foreign nationals bill to give a certain foreign nationals the right to stand as candidates at local government elections in Scotland in accordance with internationally agreed treaties. The committee's scrutiny of the bill did not highlight any significant concerns saying for those that we have referred to and on that basis the committee is content to recommend the general principle of the bill be agreed to. I now call on Stephen Kerr to speak on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives around six minutes please Mr Kerr. I should begin by congratulating Martin Whitfield on 360 seconds without hesitation, repetition or deviation. I could actually stand here and simply say that we will be supporting this bill and then sit down but I know that that would please the Deputy Presiding Officer but would disappoint the minister. Mr Kerr, I have no view, I am the chair, I have no view. I'm disappointed that you have no view of me sitting down. Anyway, it is a pleasure to speak in this debate and I do want to take the time and start off by paying tribute to all those who put themselves forward for public office. That's an appropriate thing to say, especially this week of all weeks as nominations close for the elections that we will hold in May to our local councils. We do, on this side of the chamber, believe in local democracy, whether it's standing up for local communities to decide on the future of their community themselves or making sure that local government has a fair share of funding from the Scottish Government, the Scottish Conservatives believe in local democracy. That is why we support this bill. People who have made a commitment to stay here, to be active and engaged in the community, where they are living, to raise families, to work in businesses and to work in the public services, to make friendships should absolutely be encouraged. Not only to have their say in the running of their local community, but to stand as candidates. As has been mentioned now a couple of times, the United Kingdom has agreed reciprocal candidacy arrangements with Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain. When this bill becomes law, the treaty will be ratified. People from those four countries who have moved to the United Kingdom since 1 January 2021 will have the right to stand in local elections, hence the need for this primary legislation. Working together with the United Kingdom, we in this Parliament should secure more such reciprocal arrangements. It is however imperative that we are fully aware of the risks associated with allowing candidacy rights as we have, where no reciprocal agreements exist. I feel it's fair to say that we could be in danger of letting down expatriate Scots in other countries who do not enjoy such democratic rights in their host countries. Being able to become a local councillor, joining the local council, is much more worthwhile when councillors and councils have real power. They need to have power and the funding to affect change. All of us will have come across issues that a local community wants to change but which council is powerless to do anything about. Powerless, through a lack of funding, is cut relentlessly by an SNP Government that shows no respect for local government in Scotland. Powerless, through a centralising agenda that puts policy and power in the hands of the Scottish Government and its agencies, rather than the hands of local people, is a real power grab. Powerless, through making our councillors increasingly—I know that many councillors feel very strongly about this—increasingly hide bound by the stringent rulings of the Standards Commission. Local council elections, sadly, we should all acknowledge, have a relatively low turnout. We need to encourage more people to vote and we need to encourage more people to stand for office. Councilors, sadly, are not always held in the esteem that they should be in their local communities. Why, Deputy Presiding Officer, is this? I think that it is because people feel that their local democracy does not influence what happens in their local area. Candidates who stand for public office want to be champions for their area, but when they get into the council, they find that they cannot do anything. Everything that they stood for when they were elected is out of their reach because they do not have the funds to fund local services properly because of SNP cuts, because they cannot change policies that have been set at the centre by the SNP Government that interferes in local government far too much. They cannot represent their constituents properly because many of them feel that the overly powerful Standards Commission makes them more mute than they want to be and they cannot speak up as freely as they would like on the issues that impact their constituents. Councils should be hives of democracy where local councillors are able to directly influence the lived experience of their constituents. That is why, frankly, anyone stands for election in the first place. Local elections should be a place where the approach taken by a councillor is judged on the results when they get to the next election on issues that they have been able to influence and change, but in Scotland today, under the SNP, local democracy is a shadow of its former self. The right to stand for election is sacrosanct. Now, Presiding Officer, I recognise that I am probably in the last few seconds of my allocated time. Is that correct? However, you have around six minutes. Yes. I just say, as I include many of the things that I would like to have said, but time obviously is very precious in this chamber. As a Conservative, it is my instinct to help to empower people and to disempower central government and its agencies. I believe power should be exercised as close to the people as possible. Decisions made by local people for local people should be sacrosanct and allowing all local people to have the opportunity to stand as we will make more realisable through the passing of this bill is something that we support. As I repeat, we will be supporting this bill today. Thank you. I now call on Neil Bibby to speak on behalf of Scottish Labour around four minutes, please. I commend the work of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in relation to this bill. Scottish Labour supports the proposal to extend candidacy rights to nationals of any country with which the UK signs a treaty for mutual candidacy rights at local elections. The bill will ensure that all nationals of Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain can stand as candidates in Scottish local government elections. The UK has entered into treaties with these countries to allow their nationals to be candidates here, and, as the minister said, this bill puts into law making any type of leave to remain in the UK sufficient to stand for election. The bill is therefore an important step to ensure compliance with treaties that the UK Government has agreed in relation to the candidacy in Scottish local government elections. This bill also represents an opportunity for all of us in this chamber to affirm the value of non-UK nationals in our political, social and cultural life. As local governments elections approach in May, many of us will be acutely aware of the value and importance of good local candidates. We have heard that recently about who are embedded and involved in their local communities. We should also be aware how often it is those born in other countries who represent the very best examples of people who are embedded and invested in their communities in modern Scotland. Those who have come to stay, settle and build lives in communities far from their birthplace, can be the greatest and most dedicated of local champions. It is therefore easy, Presiding Officer, to see that this is a bill that benefits only a small number of people, namely those people aspiring to stand for election. That is important and valuable of course, but there are potentially many more beneficiaries, namely those who might vote for and be represented by such persons. This bill affirms and extends the right of all people in Scotland to vote for candidates who are born beyond our shores, but who have come to live, to work and to enrich our communities. It should be commended and celebrated on that basis. Scottish Labour believes that the minister and the Government should consider a number of points as a bill progresses. The First Committee discussed in its report a concern that nationals from the same country could have different candidacy rights based solely on their immigration status. Secondly, as we have already heard, the committee recognised a point made by the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee that a future Government might not consider itself bound to remove a country from schedule 6A and that the Scottish ministers might exercise discretion in relation to that removal. The Standards Committee supports the Delegated Powers Committee call for the Scottish Government to bring forward an amendment at stage 2 to address this. Scottish Labour supports this call and we hope that it can be amended with Scottish Government support. I am very grateful to Neil Bibby to give way on that point and I just wanted... Does he agree with me that it's not just the question about whether or not they be removed, but it's the time that it may take to remove them from the schedule which may well influence local elections? I would absolutely agree with what Martin Bibby has said there. Finally, the committee also recognised it's unlikely but possible that a by-election could occur where a foreign national is required to leave the country due to a change in their immigration status. That has obvious financial implications. The minister will be aware that Renfrewshire residents are still ffumin about the waste of £16,000 of their money on a council by-election in Paisley that had to be aborted because Renfrewshire council hadn't done their homework. I know that that was an exceptional case but the fact remains that council by-elections cost money and at a time of on-going cuts to local oil and budgets that's money councils can't afford and residents can't afford to lose. Therefore, we call on the Scottish Government to ensure local authorities are aware of the potential need for additional funding for elections if individuals are elected with limited leave to remain. I welcome the minister's commitment to review the situation as necessary. I hope that the minister can give assurances that local authorities and their residents will not suffer financially. I hope that ministers will liaise with local authorities over the potential need for additional funding. I hope that those matters can be considered by the Scottish Government as the bill progresses and it's a bill that the Scottish Labour will support. Thank you. I will now move to the open debate. I call Bob Dorris, who is joining us remotely to be followed by Julian Mackay. As deputy convener of the Scottish Parliament Standards Committee, let me begin by thanking our committee convener and my committee colleagues. We were able to be guided by our committee clerking team and open and constructive engagement with the Minister for Parliamentary Business, George Adam. Regarding the legislation before us, there was pretty much unanimous consensus that the UK Government has signed treaties with Portugal and Luxembourg, which have already come into force and similar treaties with Spain and Poland will come into force shortly. Those treaties offer reciprocal candidacy rights to national residents in each other's countries. The legislation ensures that those rights can be exercised in Scotland at council elections as they should be. That is something that we all support. Given those from EU countries with indefinite leave to remain or pre-settled status will already have such rights, the numbers' impact are likely to be small, as we have already heard. However, it remains absolutely the right thing to do. We are starting from a strong position in Scotland. Scotland's Parliament has already passed the Scottish Elections and Franchises and Representations Act 2020. Section 1 of that bill extended the franchise for Scottish elections to include all those with the legal right to live in Scotland by creating a new category of voter of qualifying for national as our committee convener has already alluded to. For instance, any period of leave to remain at all in times of a person to register to vote and cast their vote. That means, for example, that people who have been granted refugee status and those who have been granted asylum will be able to vote so long as they satisfy the conditions of living in Scotland, as well as other conditions that apply to all electors for Scottish elections such as being over 16 years of age. Unfortunately, individual seeking asylum by whose claim is still undetermined cannot vote. There is also a gap between voting in candidacy rights in Scotland more generally. Anyone with any form of leave to remain could vote, but only those with indefinite leave to remain can be a candidate. That said, it still places Scotland at the forefront of democratic engagement and advancement of rights for all those residents in our country. One aspect of the bill that our committee looked at was whether the rights being extended to foreign nationals or foreign EU nations on a reciprocal basis based on UK treaty obligations could be rescinded should those treaties no longer be enforced and to ensure that candidacy rights would be removed accordingly. The committee wanted to ensure that rights conferred in section 6A essentially based on those treaty obligations could not be used in a discretionary basis in such circumstances. Our committee was broadly satisfied but acknowledged the concerns of the DPLR committees we have heard in this area. I agree that it would be welcome to have some of the assurances by waiving an amendment at stage 2. I think that that would be helpful on balance. It is by some irony, however, that I highlight the recommendation. This is because I would try by and large to wish that all EU nationals resident of Scotland to have such candidacy rights, not just those that have extended them by dint of a UK treaty or pre-settled status. In that respect, I do not concur with the comments of Mr Kerr in this debate and it is just ashamed that the hybrid Parliament does not allow for interventions at this stage, Presiding Officer. However, I can reconcile my contradictions as the Scottish Government will be consulting on legislation and electoral reform that enables more people to stand as candidates in the Scottish Parliament in local elections. That will engage with potential extending candidacy rights to all EU nationals resident of Scotland and, indeed, other groups, not simply those from Spain, Portugal, Poland and Luxembourg. I commend the Scottish Government on that approach and look forward to such legislation superseding any UK treaty. I have to admit, Presiding Officer, that I rather, like the idea of some UK treaties being consigned to history, particularly those stretching back over some 300 years. I should say, Presiding Officer, that I did that final bit in to ensure that my colleagues in the chamber are still paying attention. For now, I will simply close by commending the general principles of the bill, which is before us this afternoon through Parliament. Thank you. I now call Jarene Mackay to be followed by Willie Coffey around four minutes, please, Ms Mackay. In 2020, the Scottish Parliament passed the Scottish Elections Franchise and Representation Act, which expanded the franchise and candidacy eligibility for both local and holy red elections in Scotland. The act expanded voting rights to everyone lawfully resident in Scotland, regardless of nationality and candidacy rights to everyone with indefinite leave to remain. At the moment, only foreign nationals with indefinite leave to remain in Scotland have the right to stand as candidates in Scottish elections, either local government or holy red. That includes EU nationals with settled or pre-settled status, but the Scottish Elections Act did not confer candidacy rights to people with temporary forms of leave to remain. The Senate made similar changes to the local government and Senate franchise in 2020. As it stands, EU nationals lawfully resident in England have retained a right to vote and stand in local elections. Through the elections bill 2021-22, which wants to remove voting and candidacy rights from EU citizens who arrived in the UK after 31 December 2020, the UK Government is hellbent on restricting the franchise further, which leaves us with where we are today with the stage 1 of the Scottish local government elections, candidacy rights of foreign nationals bill. Following Brexit, the UK Government has already entered into treaties with Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain that confer reciprocal voting and candidacy rights for their nationals in the UK and UK nationals in those respective countries. That includes anyone with lawful residence, not just people with settled status, pre-settled status or indefinite leave to remain. In some cases, those treaties cannot be fully ratified until they are enshrined in law in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The bill ratifies existing treaties to ensure that legislation across the four nations is consistent. It will result in an expansion of candidacy rights for some EU nationals living in Scotland with limited leave to remain in local government elections. This Parliament does not currently have the right to convert legal residency or citizenship on those who live here, but we do have the power to make our electoral franchise as inclusive as possible. Therefore, the Scottish Greens would like to see us go further and ensure that candidacy rights mirror voting rights. If we want a residency-based franchise, then that must extend to candidacy rights. Ensuring that everyone who lives in Scotland has the ability to both vote and stand for election should be an aspiration that we all share. That is a step in the right direction, but risks creating an unequal patchwork of candidacy rights that leaves the select few countries with enhanced rights over others. That is something that we should seek to fix. Take refugees as an example. They are initially granted five years leave to remain and can then apply for indefinite leave to remain. People in this position cannot stand as a candidate purely because of the type of leave to remain the home office has decided to grant them. We know that we need more diverse representation in elected positions. Our elected bodies at all levels should reflect the people that it serves. A truly residence-based franchise and candidacy eligibility is an important part of fixing the problem. Otherwise, we are left in a situation where people are not able to represent their communities for potentially two or more electoral cycles. When we need more young people standing, it could deny young refugees like those coming from Ukraine being able to stand for a long time. The big question here is whether it is fair and proportionate to exclude someone from standing for election just because the home office has given them a temporary visa. The Scottish Greens remain committed to pursuing electoral reform that enables more people to stand as candidates at Scottish Parliament and local government elections. We look forward to working with the minister and the Scottish Government to achieve that. However, while we would like to see future legislation go further, we will be supporting the bill at stage 1. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I intend to speak to the actual motion, unlike the unfortunate name Rants that we heard earlier from the first Tory speaker, which I think was a shame. The bill must be one of the shortest I have ever seen in the Parliament. It is certainly significant because of what it does. In fact, probably all of our speeches today will be longer than the bill itself, but it is really important to bring it to the attention of the Scottish people through this debate. The treaty arrangement entered into by the UK Government will enable certain people from Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain to put themselves forward to be local councillors in Scotland. I support the bill because it continues in a direction of travel that I think is right for Scotland to take. It builds on what we have already done in Scotland with respect to candidacy rights and it continues that goal of widening our democratic engagement. Normally, the right to be a candidate depends on whether a person had indefinite leave to remain in the UK or whether they had pre-settled status. This bill, if passed, will enable people without settled and pre-settled status from those countries mentioned to become candidates if they wish to do so. It is in line with the agreements proposed by the treaty arrangement. Extending and conferring the right on people who live in Scotland to become local councillors representing the local communities is to be welcomed. I am sure that those people from those countries who have mentioned and who live in Scotland and wish to become local councillors will greatly appreciate this move by the Scottish Parliament. We know that it is only a very small number of people who may be affected by it and who might take advantage of it, but it sends a clear signal that Scotland intends to continue with progressive and inclusive democratic reforms. As ever, the Standards Committee members have done a good job in scrutinising the short bill and their stage 1 report provides us with the detail that we need to help us to understand what is being proposed and why. It also raises one or two questions that require answers. Committee, in examining the proposals and possible consequences, rightly asks what might happen if a person became a local councillor and subsequently had their immigration status changed causing a by-election to occur. While unlikely, it does present a possible risk, committee welcomed the minister's commitment to keep that aspect under review. Similarly, the committee was right to ask what would happen if the treaty itself came to an end. That aspect for me is still a little unclear, especially if a person is actually elected at that time, and it would welcome any clarification from the committee members or, indeed, the minister as to what would happen in those circumstances. Presumably, another by-election might be needed there, too. It is a very short bill and it is focused on supporting the treaty as it comes into force. Ideally, the Parliament will agree its own arrangements in the future and not via treaties entered into it by others. However, the status committee has diligently looked at the bill and asked a number of questions that could arise in certain circumstances. However, the intention behind the bill is sound and opens up greater access to participating in a parliamentary democracy in Scotland. As we look ahead, the bill can be amended if necessary to go that step further to extend candidacy rights to all foreign nationals and the Scottish Government intends to insult this year on those issues. However, for the moment, we should thank the committee for the work that is done on our behalf and welcome the bill at stage 1 and, hopefully, see it given the support that it deserves as it progresses through its parliamentary stages from law in Scotland. I now call Collette Stevenson, who will be the last speaker in the open debate around four minutes. I remind members of my register of interests. As a new member of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, I have had the opportunity to attend a couple of meetings now as part of the committee's scrutiny of the proposed Scottish local government elections candidacy rights of foreign nationals. The bill increases the opportunities for democratic engagement and ensures that we comply with international treaties. In the past, all EU citizens in the UK could stand in local elections. However, following Brexit, the Scottish Government introduced legislation to ensure those EU nationals, with settled or pre-settled status, who had made Scotland their home, could stand for elected office and vote in Scottish Parliament and local government elections. The proposed bill extends the right to nationals of a country where the UK Government signs a treaty on mutual voting and candidacy rights. Currently, the UK has agreed such treaties with Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Spain. By enabling people from those countries who do not have settled or pre-settled status to stand in local elections, the bill will support the ratification of those treaties. In its stage 1 report, the SPPA Committee concluded that the bill provides an effective approach in terms of complying with international treaties signed by the UK Government and other states. While the reforms in the bill alone will affect a small proportion of the population, they will ensure that more people can represent their local community as a councillor. The SNP stands for progressive and inclusive democratic reform, and in government the SNP has already delivered. Scotland already goes further than most other countries in allowing all resident foreign nationals, with any form of leave, to remain to vote in Scottish Parliament and Scottish local government elections. It is important to recognise that the legislation builds on the Scottish Government's work to expand democratic engagement and participation. It is also not the end of that journey. As the minister has said, the Scottish Government will consult on further electoral reforms later this year. I questioned the minister at a recent committee meeting around the potential implications of someone being elected as a councillor with limited leave to remain and then having to leave the country partway through their term, leading to a by-election. As a committee, our report mentions this possibility, and we welcome the minister's commitments to review the situation as necessary. Following the publication of the report, the minister also confirmed that the Scottish Government supports that conclusion and that the issue will be highlighted to the convener of the Electoral Management Board for Scotland. I welcome that. To conclude, while Scotland already goes to greater lengths than many countries in allowing resident foreign nationals to vote and stand in elections, the bill will further expand the opportunities to serve as a councillor. The Scottish Government has agreed with the majority of the SPPA committee's conclusions and will reflect on possible stage 2 amendments. Given that and the positive outcomes, the bill will support. I hope that all members will agree that the general principles of this are worthy of support. Presiding Officer, as my colleague Neil Bibby confirmed, we will be supporting the bill today. We are keen to extend candidacy rights to nationals of any country with which the UK Signs are treated for major candidacy rights at local elections when they have any type of leave to remain. The bill will ensure compliance with treaties that are agreed with Portugal, Poland, Spain and Mucksonburg. In the case of Spain and Poland, the bill is required as part of the ratification process on their side. There has been some discussion that this is a consequence of the United Kingdom leaving the EU, a matter raised by the SPPPA committee convener and other speakers. Prior to that, it is right that all EU nationals resident in the UK could stand as candidates in UK local elections. That right current extends to Irish citizens and people from the Commonwealth under the 1973 act. As the Standards Committee considered, our 2020 Scottish Elections Act allows someone with no immigration restrictions, indefinite leave or pre-settled status, to vote at Scottish Parliament and local government elections in Scotland. What the bill does is go further and allows someone with any leave, so long as they are from a listed country in schedule 6A, to vote and to stand, because those are reciprocal arrangements. British citizens will be able to vote and stand in Spain, Portugal, Poland and Mucksonburg local elections. As was discussed at both the Standards and Delegated Powers committees, it is sensible that the bill grants ministers powers for other countries to be added to the list by regulations. When the UK enters into similar treaties with potential other countries. I am grateful that the minister has confirmed, as he did at the committee, that a government amendment act stage 2 will require ministers to remove a schedule 6A country should a treaty be terminated. With the local elections just five weeks away, candidates across the country will be canvassing voters for their support. Obviously, we want people from all over Scotland, including those who have made this place their home, to want to stand for election to local councils. They do so to have the opportunity to make real changes in the communities that they live in and wish to represent, making decisions on services that affect people's daily lives, social care, children's education, housing and economic development. The core issues are local roads, cleirliness and refuse collections. That is a highly privileged role to be elected to, but it is not without its challenges. Online abuse and harassment are a demoralised workforce, and those who become elected will take on full-time jobs with long hours. As we have repeatedly discussed in this chamber, millions of pounds have been rincfenced out of local control, and 980 million pounds have been slashed in real terms from budgets since 2013. Regardless of who stands, we know that candidates who go on to be elected this year are likely to be making more cuts while they struggle to keep up with demand for local services. For today's purposes, Presiding Officer, I am pleased that we can widen the candidacy rights to the people of Poland, Spain, Portugal and Luxembourg, and so support this bill at stage 1. Thank you. I call on Miles Briggs to wind up on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. Around five minutes please, Mr Briggs. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I start by thanking the committee for their work, as well. I am glad to be able to speak in this debate and welcome the positive progress in extending voting rights to eligible citizens from Poland, Spain, Portugal and Luxembourg. Although this bill might not be generating the headlines, it is an important piece of legislation. The UK elections bill is drafted and is designed to clarify the voting rights of key groups of citizens in this country. It is important to note that EU nationals who were resident in the United Kingdom before 31 December fall into the first category with retained rights and are fully eligible to stand as candidates and vote in elections. The bill simply aims to expand the franchise to include those from named countries with any type of leave to remain in the United Kingdom. In this instance, for those, for example, was settled or pre-settled status. It is reassuring as well to note and others have that neither the Electoral Commission nor the Electoral Management Board have expressed any particular concern about the bill. I note from Mr Adam's response to the standard committee on the bill that he says that the Scottish Government will reflect on the amendment to the bill, which would give greater clarity to the obligation of the Scottish Government to remove a country from the schedule. I think that he suggested in his opening speech that he would be looking towards bringing an amendment on that at stage 2. The council elections, as others have outlined, are an important opportunity to refresh our democracy. I hope that it is also an opportunity to elect more diverse councils that better reflect their local communities. My own party, for example, will be standing a record number of female and bain candidates at this council election. Across the chamber, all parties have taken positive steps to try to improve candidate diversity at this election. The local government committee, which I am a member, will be undertaking additional work in the area of post-counsel elections to review the impact of the election results when they are declared. Deputy Presiding Officer, for the millions or hundreds of thousands of people who will be watching this debate, I am sure, there are just under 24 hours now or 4pm tomorrow to submit your nomination papers. I genuinely hope that people who want to see a change in their local community will do just that and stand for election, like all of us have tried to do, to make that positive change that we want to see. The minister also suggested that there is likely to be a wider election bill coming forward and forthcoming that will be consulted upon. I hope that we will see a number of reforms considered within that. I do think that council renumeration is an issue that has meant—we have heard this at committee—a number of councils have decided to stand down at this election for career reasons. The support that is available to councillors to serve their local constituents, we are very lucky to have the support that we have for staff and communications, but councillors have very different support available to them. I hope that that is also something that we can see reformed and not just based on whether or not a council decides to provide that support. I have raised this with the minister previously. The provision of a free mail election address, which MPs and MSPs are entitled to, is also something that we need to consider. Councillors should potentially also be available to have, especially given the size of STV wards, which we now see, and what will be potentially larger wards after the local government boundary commission undertake their review post council elections. I hope that all parties can look to reflect on that. The bill, though, overall is a measured and uncontroversial step. The extension of the franchise is limited to a handful of nationals in which the UK has signed such reciprocal agreements. Therefore, we will support the bill at decision time tonight and welcome future agreements in which the UK Government may reach with other countries on that. The bill seeks to bring Scottish legislation into line with the nationwide UK law, which I think is a welcome step forward. I now call on George Adam minister to wind up on behalf of the Scottish Government around five minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and just for starting, my old briggs cuts me to the quick by stating that nobody will be right and headlined about today's debate. You know, my ego is absolutely damaged because of this now, but I can understand that well anything can happen in the next five minutes, right enough. At one point, when Mr Briggs was saying for the millions of people watching at home, I thought that he was going to do the boxer announcer Michael Buffers' famous line for the millions at home, let's get ready to rumble. Hopefully that wasn't the case he was trying to imply, but with regards to some of the key points that he brought up, I was encouraged him to engage with the consultation process when it comes up later this year, and we can have those on-going discussions on the debate with regards to that. However, Presiding Officer, there has been a meaningful debate, and I thank all the members for all their contributions. Although this is a short, narrowly-focused bill, in which Willie Coffey mentioned how narrow and focused it was during his speech, at the time of saying that his speech would be longer than some parts of the bill, I think that we will meet all of our international obligations when it should go through. The issue of who can stand in our elections is also a fundamental part of our democracy, and many colleagues have said that today as well. I look forward to a further debate over the coming year with regard to that. Grateful, Presiding Officer, and thank you for giving way. I anticipate it eagerly. Would the minister be in a position to confirm to Willie Coffey that, actually, should an occasion occur where a treaty fell, the right to be councillor would similarly fall, plus the danger if the status of an individual covered by a treaty should change with regard to their immigration, potentially their right to be a councillor should stand, and perhaps for confirmation for the millions watching, can the minister confirm that, of course, this bill will not be applying to what happens on May 5 this year? To your last question, yes, I agree. To Mr Coffey's question, if a treaty came to an end while an election was underway, transitional steps will ensure no prejudice to the on-going election, but personally the odds of that happening at that time, although possible, would be quite incredible. However, just as I was saying with Mr Whitfield, the convener of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, he brought up the idea that Scottish Government and future Governments may not stand by future treaties. That was brought up at the committee as well. One of the things that I said that I did say, we will look at that as we move into stage 2, because it is one of the issues that the committee made very obvious to me. One of the other things that Mr Whitfield brought up, and he did at the committee, and again today, was on the potential idea for by-elections. Should someone put their name forward, it is not eligible, and there ends up a by-election in the time. I said at that point that the funding of local government elections are for local government, and that is correct. However, the fact that you would have a situation where there would be such a small number of individuals, that would not add to the number of by-elections that we have over that period. However, as I said, we continue to engage with local government on that issue as well. Stephen Kerr took to his feet and spoke about absolutely everything, Presiding Officer, bar the actual bill itself. However, he did say that he was going to agree with me, and he could sit down at that stage, and I wish he had, because he went on to go on about other things that we can debate in other debates. For me, it is important that we focus on the actual bill and what it does to the individuals and the communities that it actually does. I will add one thing about Mr Kerr when he spoke about local government. He seems to not be aware that the United Kingdom Government has cut 63 per cent off of core funds for local government over the past decade. I will cut and paste a bit of his speech from the official record and send it down to a Westminster equivalent and see what it thinks of Mr Kerr's contribution. To answer Mr Bibby's question, I would say that the bill is what it is and does what it sets out to do. I have aspirations like him for electoral reform, and I am committed to the future consultation and to look at that in different ways of working. Again, that is part of the consultation process that we will be going through. On to Mr Doris, who I have known for more years, Presiding Officer, than both of his kerf to remember, just to say as always, Bob, I was listening and I agree with you when everyone maybe did not pick up his point, but he will not be surprised on the issue that he was talking about that I agree with him on that. Gillian Mackay was passionate about her desire to ensure that we increase and ensure that more people get the right to vote and actually do so. The consultation again will give us that opportunity to engage with that. Can I just say that Collette Stevenson may say that she never took part in many debate and many actual committee meetings herself, but she gets it what this bill is about and she summarised eloquently what we are trying to do here with this actual bill. I look forward to future engagements at the committee with Ms Stevenson on that as well. I think that when we look at today's debate, it has been a very good debate with what this bill, as I have said before, says and does what it says and it didn't, because effectively it is to make sure that this small percentage of individuals get that opportunity to get involved in local government. Sometimes we need to be careful that we don't tie ourselves in knots to ensure that we get to a place where we think there might be problems whether there's not. I often say to members when we've discussed this very issue that there's only a small percentage of us getting involved and putting our names forward for elected office and of that small percentage we end up spending the rest of time knocking each other in the head with a big stick and falling out at each other. I think that when you look at the idea of the potential expense for by-elections on this issue, it's just a case of when you look at that itself. I think that there might not be as many by-elections as some individuals might be concerned about. However, as I said, I'll take on board just about everything that all the individuals have said here today. My concluding remarks would be that, while this bill has had to be brought forward at an accelerated pace, I'm pleased that it's attracted wide-ranging support in the chamber today. I hope that members will enjoy and join me in supporting the principles of the bill and look forward to fuller debates. Thank you minister. That concludes the stage 1 debate on Scottish local government elections. Candidacy writes a foreign nationals bill. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 3853 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on setting out changes to this week's business. I call on George Adam minister to move the motion. I rise to speak to my amendment to the business motion which I move. Over the weekend, there were some extraordinary revelations from former Scottish Government economic adviser Jim McCall regarding his company being awarded ferry contracts by the Scottish Government. McCall told us on the times that, I quote, the audit report has revealed that we were given the contract for political purposes. Everything was about the optics and timing the announcements for political gain, end of quote. This claim has been supported by a senior SNP source saying, quote, it was all done and dusted to give a big conference headline for Nicolaus's first Holyrood election as leader, end of quote. Following those reports, I wrote to the minister for parliamentary business twice, requesting a statement to be made by the First Minister tomorrow on the unravelling scandal. I received no responses to my emails, but today the minister confirmed in the bureau that the First Minister would not be delivering a statement. On Thursday, in response to questions from Douglas Ross on the issue, the First Minister said, the buck stops with me. Those words now ring hollow. You may say nonsense, but those words now ring hollow. My amendment would insert the statement as the first item of tomorrow's afternoon's business at which time I know that the First Minister is available. I expect that the SNP will vote against my amendment. That is nothing more than cover-up orders from their boss while they further their plans to throw former ministers under the bus. However, I do hope that every other MSP, including those from the Scottish Greens, finds the backbone to stand up to the SNP's secret Scotland and back my amendment. It is time that we had answers. I move the amendment to the business motion in my name, which also inserts a statement from the First Minister on ferry procurement this week. The ferries fiasco is one of the biggest public procurement disasters of the last 20 years. Ferries for Scotland's islands are five years late and two and a half times over budget. As the Audit Scotland report makes clear, there is a lot of blame to go round. Last week, the First Minister tried to blame Derek Mackay for the enormous risk exposed to the taxpayer and today Kate Forbes tried to pin all that blame elsewhere. It is now clear that only a public inquiry will get to the bottom of all this. However, right now, the Scottish Government is ultimately responsible for the promises that it made to islanders and the Ferguson's workforce, and it is the First Minister who is ultimately responsible for the Scottish Government. That is why, at the weekend, Opposition parties called for the First Minister to give an urgent statement on that matter. Yesterday, Nicola Sturgeon said, I have no hesitation in answering any and all questions. This amendment provides her with an opportunity to do so. In response to the question of whether the First Minister had given the go-ahead to ignore email, the First Minister said, I didn't say don't go ahead. That explanation is simply not good enough. In the midst of a cost of living crisis, it is Scottish taxpayers who are now paying the costs of this Government's failure. The First Minister must make this statement. Nicola Sturgeon needs to clarify the Government's decision-making process to ignore email. She needs to clarify the Cabinet's role, Keith Brown's role, John Swinney's role and her own role in that decision. It is one of the principal duties of Parliament to hold the Government to account. Therefore, it is our duty to get to the bottom of what went wrong and how this fiasgo unfolded. The First Minister is very good at proclaiming repeatedly, in fact, that she is ultimately responsible and takes responsibility, where the place to take responsibility is on the floor of this chamber. We need openness, honesty and transparency. We cannot afford secrecy and cover-up. Frankly, it would be scandalous if Nicola Sturgeon's own MSPs and the Greens used their votes to block a statement this week from the First Minister. I will stick to the parliamentary process and how we are moving forward. I am a bit concerned that Mr Kerr feels to think that he knows exactly where the First Minister's diary is and where she is going to be at any time. There has been a very full and significant scrutiny on the subject. Parliament has spent nearly four hours discussing the issue in the past week. Split among the Cabinet Secretary's statement, the Conservatives' debate, the First Minister's questions and, today, the topical question. That is on top of the parliamentary inquiry previously. There is no more to add currently. Any further time will simply be filled with yet more interpretations of Audit Scotland's report from last week. There has been many interpretations from those outwith this place with regard to the Audit Scotland report from last week. To look at some of the background that we have had in the past week, Wednesday 23 March, there was a ministerial statement in Ferguson's marine update. That was 32 minutes. On Wednesday 23 March, the Scottish Conservative debate on Ferry's two-hours 49 minutes. On Thursday 24 March, the First Minister's question where the First Minister was on the floor of this chamber, answering questions on this issue, 14 minutes. Tuesday 29 March, topical question from Mr Bibby. From Mr Bibby, capably handled by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Kate Forbes, who answered numerous questions from individuals. That was a further 12 minutes. That situation will rightly be scrutinised further by the Scottish Parliament, but, at this time and at this moment, there is nothing further to add. I remind members that, if the amendment in the name of Stephen Kerr is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Neil Bibby will fall. The question is that amendment 3853.2, in the name of Stephen Kerr, which seeks to amend motion 3853, in the name of George Adam, on setting out changes to this week's business, be agreed. Are we all agreed? The Parliament will therefore move to a vote and there shall be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.