Scotland Act 1998: Section 35 Power

Debate between Alister Jack and Amy Callaghan
Tuesday 17th January 2023

(1 year, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alister Jack Portrait Mr Jack
- Hansard - -

I thank my hon. Friend for that. This is absolutely about safeguards and protecting safe spaces for women and children. She is absolutely right about that, and she also makes the point about the risk of lowering the bar for bad faith actors.

Amy Callaghan Portrait Amy Callaghan (East Dunbartonshire) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Enacting section 35 is disgraceful and unprecedented, and doing so brings the risk of this political tactic being used again. Does the Secretary of State envision section 35 being used against any other Bills progressing through Holyrood? If not, why is it being used only against this Bill?

Alister Jack Portrait Mr Jack
- Hansard - -

The hon. Lady is right to say that this is unprecedented and there is a very high bar here; this was not a decision I reached easily or took lightly. However, the legal advice was very strong and it was for section 35 to be used, and I have used it. As I said earlier, 347 Acts have gone through the Scottish Parliament in the past nearly 24 years. The system works and the Scotland Act 1998 works. Whether the SNP likes it or not—let us remember that the SNP did vote for it in 1998—it does provide for a section 35 order, and it is for this type of event.

Scottish Referendum Legislation: Supreme Court Decision

Debate between Alister Jack and Amy Callaghan
Wednesday 23rd November 2022

(1 year, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Amy Callaghan Portrait Amy Callaghan (East Dunbartonshire) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will ask the Secretary of State the same question that I asked the Prime Minister just a short while ago, to which I am still waiting for an answer. What is the route for a nation to leave this so-called voluntary Union? He has answered three times now referring to a majority of votes, so would the Government respect the result of a general election as a de facto referendum?

Alister Jack Portrait Mr Jack
- Hansard - -

General elections are when people expect parties to come forward with manifestos on the issues that Scotland and the United Kingdom face. That is what general elections are for.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Alister Jack and Amy Callaghan
Wednesday 8th January 2020

(4 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alister Jack Portrait Mr Jack
- Hansard - -

What we are respecting is the democratic outcome of referendums, which the SNP does not respect. The referendum in 2016 was a United Kingdom referendum, and we voted to leave the European Union. We are respecting that. Under the Sewel convention, we have provision for what is known as “not normal”. This is a constitutional matter. Constitutional matters are reserved, and they are not normally under the remit of the Scottish Parliament. We are delivering what the 2016 referendum requested us to deliver.

Amy Callaghan Portrait Amy Callaghan
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This Tory Government are claiming that their 43% of the vote in the last general election provides them with an overwhelming mandate to implement Brexit. Can the Secretary of State therefore explain the absolutely blinding contradiction of his own position when he says that the 45% vote for the SNP, providing 80% of Scottish seats in this very House, does not equate to a mandate for the people of Scotland to choose our own future?

Alister Jack Portrait Mr Jack
- Hansard - -

It was a referendum three years ago. We are speaking for the majority of Scots. The majority of voters voted in 2016 to leave the European Union. We are respecting that decision, whereas the SNP is not respecting it and wants to tear up the United Kingdom.