THE European flag will remain flying outside the Scottish Parliament after MSPs voted to overturn the removal.
Depute Presiding Officer Linda Fabiani reminded MSPs of the chamber rules several times during a bad-tempered debate yesterday afternoon.
The Scottish Parliament’s Corporate Body (SPCB) had decided to lower the starred standard after the UK leaves the European Union tomorrow.
The decision was taken at a meeting of the non-party grouping, but became a major point of debate and prompted yesterday’s debate.
That session included concerns that overruling the SPCB would set a precedent that could allow any serving Scottish Government to override mechanisms supposed to limit the power of any administration.
READ MORE: Scottish Parliament votes in favour of holding indyref2
Some argued the vote was a waste of parliamentary time, with Tory justice spokesman Liam Kerr expressing anger that the half-hour slot on flags was allotted even though he had been unable to secure a ministerial statement on the police estate.
And Ross Greer of the Scottish Greens accused those objecting to the debate of posturing for political gain.
The blue-and-yellow flag – which was originally drawn up to represent the European Council, of which the UK will remain a member – was supposed to come down at 11pm tomorrow as UK withdrawal becomes a reality.
But yesterday MSPs voted by 63 to 54 to keep it in place.
The SPCB pledged to honour that result.
Despite suggestions that the LibDems would abstain, only one member did – Andy Wightman of the Greens.
Speaking for the Scottish Government, Culture Secretary Fiona Hyslop said that “some, of course, will seek to criticise our actions as purely symbolic, but at times of uncertainty and desperation, symbols and the values of symbols, and what they represent, do matter”.
Hyslop said the flying of the flag would give reassurance to the 230,000 EU citizens living in this country and argued that the SPCB decision did not “reflect the views of parliament as a whole”.
That, she said, is why it was necessary to bring the vote.
However, Tory Liz Smith said overruling the neutral SPCB was a dangerous step, stating: “It is vital that there is full trust and confidence in the work of the corporate body to act in an impartial manner on behalf of all members, rather than on behalf of the political parties of the parliament.
“The issue before this parliament today is not what we think about the withdrawal of the UK from the EU, it’s about whether members of this parliament are prepared to undermine the corporate body.
“Are we well aware of the dangers that could provide?”
Jeers broke out at several points during the debate, with Fabiani issuing a warning on conduct to MSPs.
Kerr asked Greer if he felt “any shame or embarrassment” for backing the debate.
Greer accused Kerr of a “moment of self-indulgence”, claiming the Tories were “delighted that this debate is taking place” and hoped to gain politically from it.
He went on: “The only real losers here are the Liberal Democrats, the party of Europe, who, unless they’re about to make some significant u-turn, are set to vote with the Conservatives to take the flag down.”
LibDem Liam McArthur responded: “It’s a matter of deep regret to me that this parliament is having this debate on this government motion and has just been subjected to that contribution from Ross Greer.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel