Matheson to face knife edge vote on Holyrood suspension

Parliament is due to vote on whether to approve the recommendations, but John Swinney told Holyrood last Thursday he would not be supporting the punishment, accusing the committee of being prejudiced because of comments previously made by one of its members Annie Wells about Mr Matheson's iPad bill.

Holyrood has 63 SNP MSPs and 65 opposition MSPs meaning the vote will be extremely close.

The Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone does not normally vote but does so in the event of a tie. She votes according to a protocol of supporting the status quo. It is unclear what the status quo means in the situation, whether to support the committee report and sanction Mr Matheson or not.

READ MORE: 'Swinney ill-advised to defend Matheson from MSPs sanctions'

The debate and vote on the standards committee's report will take place in Holyrood from 2.50pm to 3.20pm tomorrow.

The motion tabled by Martin Whitfield, the Labour MSP who is convener of the standards' committee, states: "That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee's 1st Report, 2024 (Session 6), Complaint against Michael Matheson MSP (SP Paper 597), and agrees to impose the sanctions recommended in the report that the Parliament excludes Michael Matheson MSP from proceedings of the Parliament for a period of 27 sitting days and withdraws his salary for a period of 54 calendar days to take effect from the day after this motion is agreed."

A separate Conservative led debate calling for Mr Matheson to resign as a MSP will be held immediately afterwards. The Scottish Greens will not support the Tory motion meaning that it is highly unlikely the motion calling from him to step down as an MSP will pass.

The development comes as James Mitchell, professor or public policy at Edinburgh University, said he did not think it likely the First Minister should have defended Mr Matheson from the committee's recommendations and doubted if he would have pursued such a course of action if key aide Kevin Pringle still being advising him.

Mr Pringle, a long serving SNP strategist, who advised Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and Humza Yousaf when they were first ministers, was not rehired by Mr Swinney.

Professor Mitchell said the ongoing row over Mr Matheson's actions was overshadowing the SNP's general election campaign and along with other troubles gave voters the impression of a party that was "entitled".

READ MORE: Courts face major disruption as lawyers take action

The Falkirk West MSP, a close ally of Mr Swinney, claimed an £11,000 roaming charges incurred on his parliamentary iPad from the Holyrood expense account, saying it was for legitimate parliamentary business, before it emerged that his sons had run up the bill watching football online on a Moroccan holiday. He has paid the money back to the parliament.

Last week, Holyrood's standards committee investigating his conduct handed Mr Matheson a 27-day suspension from the Scottish Parliament alongside a 54-day pay cut, roughly equivalent to the size of the bill.

“John Swinney’s defence of Michael Matheson was ill-advised.  It seems unlikely that someone like Kevin Pringle, a more experienced and informed adviser, would have proposed this course of action," Professor Mitchell told The Herald.

"But ultimately the buck must stop at John Swinney. He ought to have foreseen the public reaction and more importantly recognised that his defence of Matheson was wrong. Whatever his expectation, the public see the SNP leader trying to defend the indefensible.

"This issue has dragged on for months – Michael Matheson should have resigned as soon as this emerged or should have been sacked.  Instead, this now overshadows the election and along with the SNP’s other troubles contributes to an image of a party that has become entitled.  But far more worryingly it contributes to public cynicism about politics."

Professor Mitchell said SNP campaigners would probably be getting the reaction among voters about the stance the First Minister had taken towards Mr Matheson.

"The tendency of the SNP to refuse to own its failures and misdemeanours but to try and turn criticisms on its critics is especially cynical but will do the SNP no good.  It may now be too late for a fulsome and unqualified apology and acceptance of the committee’s recommendation as was required and, as SNP canvassers will no doubt become well aware over the coming weeks, expected by the public.  Many people are struggling to pay bills and will be appalled by a First Minister trying to deflect criticism in defence of a party colleague."

He added: "It would have helped had Annie Wells recused herself though this is not the main issue but is a matter that may need attention at some point.  A replacement for Ms Wells would in all likelihood have made no difference.  

"The question that may need to be addressed in light of this episode is whether an alternative, more independent body ought to make such decisions.  

"Having MSPs sit in judgment on each other should not be a problem but if party politics intrudes then party politicians may need to be removed from decision making.  This would be a great pity but may be necessary.   However, it would be wrong to make any major changes based on this one example."  

Asked about the standards' committee's recommended sanctions during First Minister's Questions last week, Mr Swinney pointed to remarks made by the Tory MSP Ms Wells when she said the "desperate efforts" by Mr Matheson to justify his expenses claim had been "riddled with lies, cover-ups and the need for us all to suspend our disbelief."

Mr Swinney said that if a constituent was facing disciplinary action at work and their employer made similar comments, he would “come down on that employer like a tonne of bricks”.

He added: “That is the situation that Michael Matheson is facing here, and that is why I will not be supporting the sanction.”

Speaking to journalists last weekend, Mr Swinney said: “I’m not going to have prejudice taken forward in any part of Scottish life, it shouldn’t happen in the Scottish parliament.”

He noted that another Conservative MSP - Stephen Kerr -  had withdrawn from the standards committee due to previous comments about Mr Matheson, adding: “We cannot have our national parliament presiding over prejudice and certainly not prejudice from the Conservatives.”

Matheson, who eventually repaid the £11,000 from his own pocket, is facing calls to resign as an MSP over the iPad row, but has insisted he will remain in place.

A Scottish Conservative motion calling for Mr Matheson to stand down as an MSP will be debated later on Wednesday.

Scottish Conservative Chairman Craig Hoy: "John Swinney is continuing to defend the indefensible by backing his friend and SNP colleague Michael Matheson.

 "In the real world, Michael Matheson would have been sacked for what he did. Voters across Scotland are rightly furious that the First Minister still won't do the right thing.

 "His response in singling out my colleague Annie Wells smacked of being a desperate distraction.
"If he won't do the right thing and sack the disgraced former health secretary, then on 4th July, voters in key seats can help sack the SNP by voting Scottish Conservative."