HOLYROOD's presiding officer is to absent herself from a review of the ban on MSPs employing their relatives over a potential conflict of interest.
Tricia Marwick will play no part in the exercise due to her employing her son Steven as a constituency assistant. In response to public concern, MSPs voted in 2010 to stop themselves hiring close family members at taxpayers' expense.
The curb applied to new hires and also meant existing employees would have to find alternative employment by mid-2015.
This date was chosen as it fell months after the Parliament election was scheduled to take place.
However, the date of the Parliament poll has since been put back a year.
Holyrood's governing corporate body is now "likely" to revisit the timing of the family ban in light of the election decision.
Supporters of a change believe waiting until after 2016 will result in a fall in the number of MSPS who employ relatives, and reduce the chance of a legal challenge. However, senior Holyrood figures fear a review could lead to the reversal of the ban in its entirety, as Westminster still allows MPs to employ one family member. When a possible review was discussed at the corporate body earlier this month, Marwick, who chairs the body, excused herself from the discussion.
She will also absent herself when the matter comes back to the corporate body later this year. According to the latest parliamentary register, Steven Marwick is listed as having worked part-time for his mother for a period until April 2009, and full-time thereafter. Twelve MSPs are listed as employing a close family member, including the SNP's Stewart Maxwell, whose wife is registered as a part-time researcher, and Labour MSP Michael McMahon, whose spouse is a parliamentary assistant.
John Wilson, an SNP MSP, applauded Marwick's decision: "I welcome the Presiding Officer's decision to absent herself from any deliberations on this matter, which followed a review by Sir Neil McIntosh."
"
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