MSPs need more time to make use of Holyrood's famous "think pods", among a range of changes recommended for the way they work in the third session of the Scottish Parliament.
MSPs need more time to make use of Holyrood's famous "think pods", among a range of changes recommended for the way they work in the third session of the Scottish Parliament.
They are being told they should tackle fewer pieces of legislation, and take more time to do so properly, while dedicating more hours to review laws already passed. A review of the role of MSPs draws on in-depth interviews with 15 of them from across the party range, carried out by the Scottish Council Foundation (SCF).
The think tank did similar surveys during the parliament's first term and found some aspects of MSP life have improved, including relations between constituency and regional members.
The report's author, Frauke Sinclair, recommended more initial guidance, training and support for new MSPs, while the Presiding Officer should crack down on overt party politicking in debate.
A recurring theme of her research was that the first two sessions have seen too much legislating and not enough scanning of the political horizon from the "think pod" spaces designed into their Holyrood offices.
According to one Labour MSP: "We have been given these thinking pods, but we are never in them." Another said: "We are too wrapped up in passing new bills, and don't spend enough time reflecting how are things working, what should we do next?"
An SNP member commented: "Long-term thinking is difficult to do in the actual office, as offices are like gold fish bowls and there are constant interruptions".
Legislation and debates in the parliamentary chamber were described as deficient. "Many MSPs in our study felt that too much legislation had been passed and that its quality was variable, often because of the fast speed of bills' progress," the report found.
"This resulted in some incomplete bills which took a partial rather than a joined-up approach to issues, and legislation which required further legislation in order to work effectively."
With few MSPs having experience of Westminster work, their reflection on their political career is that it involves more disappointments than successes, and that they found they had to be thick-skinned and not easily offended. An independent MSP told researchers "there is an element of bullying that you also find in a primary school playground".
The MSPs have high opinions of much of the work carried out in committees, which is not noticed and tends to be less partisan. It is suggested there should be less turnover of committee members, to build expertise, that committees should do better at communicating what they do, and that party whips should not intervene when cross-party consensus has been achieved.
There were complaints too much attention is paid to grandstanding and party points-scoring in debates and First Minister's question time, and MSPs criticised their own party colleagues, though unattributably, for the way they play the party game.
Frauke Sinclair said: "It is possible in setting up the Scottish Parliament, Scotland has copied too much from Westminster and inherited some of its less attractive characteristics, such as the way First Minister's Questions are run.
"When the MSPs in our study commented on aspects they felt worked well, such as the relative strength of the committees and the petitions committee, it is noticeable these are matters in which the Scottish Parliament is distinct from Westminster."
