MSPs have demanded David Mundell appear before them to explain why Westminster has pushed ahead with Brexit legislation in devolved areas without Holyrood’s consent.
The Scottish Parliament’s party constitution committee has asked the Scottish Secretary to give evidence on the resulting “implications for the devolution settlement”.
In a letter to Mr Mundell, committee convener Bruce Crawford invited him to appear at Holyrood “as a matter of urgency”.
However a Whitehall source said that, although Mr Mundell was willing to appear, it may not before the summer recess, meaning September at the earliest.
It follows Westminster agreeing a controversial “power grab” in the EU Withdrawal Bill, which a majority MSPs refused to endorse in May because it undermined devolution.
The Bill means 24 devolved policy areas being repatriated from Brussels at Brexit will be reserved at Westminster for up to seven years, rather than lying at Holyrood.
The UK Government says the measure is necessary to create UK-wide common frameworks to protect the UK single market through harmonised regulations.
However the Scottish Government has said such frameworks must be agreed by “consent”, not imposed, something the UK Government has rejected as a veto power.
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, told BBC Radio Scotland that Mr Mundell “sat back” and “did nothing” in the Commons on Tuesday when others were raising the issue.
“He should be ashamed of himself.. and ought to resign,” he said, adding it was an “utter disgrace” that only 15 minutes was made available to debate the unprecedented situation, and that was hogged by Cabinet Office minister David Lidington.
In response, Mr Mundell said the debate time was “unfortunate”, but blamed the Labour Party for pursuing numerous unwinnable votes.
He said: “It would have been possible to have had much, much more time to debate the issues in question.
“David Lidington took numerous interventions through his period. What would have been much much better would have been to have longer to have had the debate.
“The way of achieving that was for Labour not to pursue everything to a vote.”
When it was pointed out the parliamentary timetable was set by the Government, not the opposition, Mr Mundell said: “people knew exactly how much time was available.
“The Labour Party knew exactly how much time there would be left to debate these issues if they took every single vote, which is what they did, and I think that’s very regrettable.
“Even if we had had 100 hours of debate the outcome wouldn’t have changed because the SNP and Scottish Government position is exactly the same as it was on day one of this Bill.”
Asked to characterise his handling of the matter, including an absence of previously promised amendments, Mr Mundell said: “It’s now quite clear that it was never going to be possible to get agreed amendments because Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish Government have a different view of devolution from everyone else.”
Asked if he had considered resigning, Mr Mundell replied: “I consider that what I have done is stood up for the constitutional settlement that people voted for in 2014.
“Ian Blackford, Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP, don’t like that settlement, don’t support it.
“I’m not going to apologise for standing up for the settlement people voted for.”
However he refused to say whether he had considered his position.
Mr Mundell has frequently given evidence to various Holyrood committees about Brexit.
He is due to appear before the Justice Committee on Thursday to discuss cross-border legal disputes and criminal justice co-operation between Scotland and the EU post-Brexit.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel