THE row over Holyrood's ability to hold ministers to account has deepened amid fresh claims SNP MSPs are obstructing scrutiny of the government and protecting colleagues in positions of power.
Sources yesterday claimed Nationalist backbenchers were attempting to suppress a public petition calling for independence referendums for Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles.
In a separate case, the SNP-dominated finance committee was accused of withdrawing an expert's invitation to give evidence after he submitted a report that contradicted government claims about an independent Scotland's membership of the EU.
Labour MSP Michael McMahon claimed SNP MSPs were acting as "shields" for ministers, and warned increasing control over committee business was "not healthy for the democratic process in this country".
The latest claims emerged after opposition MSPs on Holyrood's public audit committee hit out after producing a minority report on the troubled launch of Police Scotland. The SNP majority on the watchdog committee voted through an official report that removed criticism of Kenny MacAskill's handling of the police force mergers last year.
Labour's Hugh Henry, the committee convener, said it was a product of a "cult of obedience and slavishness" imposed on SNP backbenchers.
One of the new claims relates to a petition lodged with the public petitions committee two weeks ago calling for constitutional referendums for Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles.
A group of campaigners want islanders to have a choice of becoming independent, remaining part of Scotland or, in the event of a Yes vote in September's referendum, staying in the UK.
Sources close to the committee said SNP MSPs were attempting to keep the petition off the agenda - even though MSPs are obliged to consider a properly lodged petition - to prevent discussion of an issue that would potentially be embarrassing for Alex Salmond.
SNP members of the finance committee were also accused of protecting ministers after an expert witness, academic Matt Qvortrup, failed to appear before MSPs yesterday as planned. He had submitted written evidence stating there was "no guarantee" an independent Scotland would be admitted to the EU or UN.
His submission was not published because his invitation to appear in person was withdrawn. However, it was released following a request by Labour finance spokesman Iain Gray.
The Labour MSP said: "The SNP choose to play games, first insisting on witnesses they expect to be helpful to them, and then dumping them when their views don't suit the SNP line. The decision to withdraw Matt Qvortrup from giving evidence based on his written submission makes clear that the SNP will actively seek to suppress views if the conclusions don't match their expectations."
Mr McMahon said: "Too often backbenchers see themselves as shields for ministers. It is not healthy for this parliament and for the democratic process in this country."
An SNP spokesman said: "We reject and deplore these partisan attacks, which are not supported by the facts. SNP MSPs on committees take their roles very seriously.
"It must be recognised that the cross-party nature of committee work means that there are sometimes areas on which members cannot reach agreement. In these cases, votes are taken and a democratic decision is reached. These allegations are more evidence of the opposition parties attempting to undermine the Scottish Parliament's committee system."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article