SCOTTISH Labour has been accused of "anti-family" politics after it was said to have blocked a deal to protect the voting rights of a pregnant Nationalist MSP.
The SNP government backed a "pairing" arrangement to cover the maternity leave of one of their members, Angela Constance.
But opposition parties blocked the request in a move that is likely to deprive the SNP of its one-seat lead over Labour when the MSP is off.
The row follows the cross-party discussions on whether a Westminster-style pairing system can be introduced at Holyrood. MPs, through being paired with a member from another party, can miss votes in the knowledge that their opposite number will not vote either.
A similar system was recently proposed for MSPs who go on foreign trips, and the SNP wanted to extend the system to other areas - to include covering Constance's maternity leave, which is expected to begin early next year.
However, the Sunday Herald understands the proposal, made by SNP business manager Bruce Crawford, was rebuffed by Labour and the Liberal Democrats.
Granting a pregnancy deal would have maintained the SNP's one-seat lead over Labour, a fact the Nationalists believe explains the rejection.
One party insider said: "It doesn't say much for Labour's much vaunted commitment to a family-friendly parliament that they said no. It is disappointing that opposition parties are not prepared to co-operate on this."
But Labour business manager Jackie Baillie responded by saying that the SNP, when in opposition, refused to support the pairing system.
"The architects of where we are now are the SNP," she said. "They didn't support pairing in the first four years, or in the second four years. I am happy to consider, on an informal basis, a case-by-case arrangement."
She said no pairing deal was in place to cover the maternity leave of Labour MSPs Wendy Alexander, Karen Gillon and former member Susan Deacon.
An SNP spokesman said: "Absence arrangementsarediscussedonan ongoing basis."
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