Holyrood's Presiding Officer Kenneth Gibson has defended the parliament's decision to put up a media "pen" after a backlash from parliamentary reporters and newspaper editors amid fears it restricts journalists from asking questions of political leaders.
In his first media interview since a row over the measure erupted last week Mr Gibson insisted the action was appropriate after concerns were raised about alleged "intimidating" behaviour by reporters.
The Herald pointed out the pen was being implemented at a time when journalists and press freedom were under attack across the world.
"I don't think it is restricting press freedom," he said.
Read More:
- Press freedom in Scotland: Why Holyrood media pen matters
- SNP accused of bid to install loyalist as Presiding Officer
- Kenneth Gibson elected new Presiding Officer of Scottish Parliament
- Holyrood media pen bringing Parliament 'into disrepute'
The Herald said there was a "fundamental difference of outlook on that" with journalists and editors believing it did restrict press freedom.
Mr Gibson insisted the pen was an "appropriate" response to concerns raised about "intimidating behaviour by journalists" and that the matter would be discussed today by the Scottish Parliament's Corporate Body, the cross-party group which manages the building.
The Herald asked the Presiding Officer if it would not have been better to have gone to the body representing political journalists the Scottish Parliamentary Journalists Association (SPJA) with any concerns which could have been addressed rather than putting up the pen.
"I think the action taken was appropriate, given the circumstances that were brought our attention," he said.
"We didn't suddenly decide to do it for the sake of doing it. There were obviously strong reasons for that and we will deliberate over that tomorrow."
In what was a testy exchange Mr Gibson was at first reluctant to discuss the subject in the interview which had been previously arranged.
Asked why the media pen set up and if there been any complaints about journalists, he said: "Is this interview simply going to be about the pen?
"Because that's not what we agreed to have this interview about.... There are other issues that are happening in parliament other than this particular issue. This is a journalistic focus, I don't think that's necessarily what the wider public are focused on."
He went on to say that the corporate body would be examining the issue in-depth on Thursday and that parliament was planning to "subsequently to engage with all users of the building" including journalists, staff members and MSPs.
"Over the summer we will look at it all fully, where we feel journalists should or should not have access, because we all have to ensure this building is for all users and we have to ensure we have full scrutiny in the chamber and we need scrutiny from journalists as well, that will certainly be honoured," he said.
He revealed the decision on the designated area was taken by him and the parliament's chief executive David McGill without it having been discussed by the corporate body.
But he said it was a continuation of existing policy.
"This is a continuation of policy in terms of the fact that presiding officer and the chief executive can in certain circumstances take decisions if they feel they will benefit all the building users," he said pointing out a pen had previously been used in the last parliament.
A restricted area was erected for journalists to ask questions after First Ministers Questions for a short time in last parliament in the midst of the crisis over former health secretary Michael Matheson's iPad expenses claim but quickly taken down. Mr Matheson later resigned over the matter.
The Scottish Parliament announced on Thursday last week that reporters would be limited to doorstepping politicians directly after First Minister’s Questions (FMQs) from within a designated area.
It said it decided to impose the designated zone for the media “following feedback from a range of building users and discussion with all parties”.
But the move sparked accusations that it will prevent scrutiny of politicians, particularly First Minister John Swinney and fellow SNP ministers.
Questioning politicians as they leave the Holyrood chamber has allowed journalists to scrutinise ministers over key issues including the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (QEUH) scandal and Michael Matheson’s iPad expenses.
But with the introduction of the pen area, the parliament wanted journalists to wait for politicians to approach them for questioning rathe than allowing reporters to approach ministers.
The measure was last week condemned by the trade union the National Union of Journalists and criticised by editors this week.
Scotland's newspaper editors ordered their journalists to defy Holyrood's new media pen and warned that the restriction on the press had brought the parliament "into disrepute".
In a joint letter to Presiding Officer Kenneth Gibson and chief executive David McGill, Newsbrands Scotland — acting on behalf of every Scottish daily editor — said it was "very disappointing that it has to be explained to politicians that the ability for journalists to question them about debates which have just taken place is an essential part of public scrutiny."
The signatories include the editors of The Herald, The National, the Glasgow Times, and the Editor-in-Chief of Newsquest Scotland.
The editors said they were unaware of any complaint about the conduct of parliamentary journalists, and questioned claims that all political parties had been consulted on the proposal, describing support as "far from unanimous."
"It is staggering that a supposedly democratic institution should introduce a control without any consultation with those affected. Consultation is built into every level of public decision-making except, it would seem, the Scottish Parliament," the editors added.
They warned that reporters were not the only ones being sidelined: "It is not just reporters that politicians are being allowed to dodge, but also the readers and viewers they represent."
The editors said that "in the absence of its abandonment we will be instructing our journalists to ignore the restriction and operate as before."
In a separate complaint the SPJA wrote to Mr Gibson and Mr McGill expressing "serious concern" about a decision it described as a "significant departure from established parliamentary practice."
The SPJA said the change risked undermining the ability of journalists to scrutinise elected representatives and warned that it created "a physical and symbolic barrier between elected representatives and those tasked with holding them to account".
The association said it had engaged with Parliament communications staff just days before the pen was introduced, with an "acceptance that our work must not hamper that of other parliamentary staff".
The journalists' group added: "There was not one mention of sanctions like a pen, which we took in good faith. That good faith is clearly undermined by today's unilateral decision."
It is not known who raised concerns about journalists' actions.
Last week the Scottish Greens issued a statement saying they did not call for the media pen and were not involved in the decision.
But asked by The Herald from the pen whether he supported the restrictions, the party’s co-leader Ross Greer said: “Have a word with some of your colleagues about their behaviour.”
The Greens have previously voiced concerns about what they claimed was the harassment of the newly elected MSP Q Manivannan by some media outlets.
Reform UK reportedly raised concerns about doorstepping during a parliamentary bureau meeting. Thomas Kerr, the party’s deputy leader in Scotland, said last Thursday: “Behave yourself and you will get back out.” He later said his remarks were made in jest.
