How Covid and Scottish Green ministers killed off cross-party co-operation in Scottish Parliament – Maurice Golden

Once the Scottish Government had to negotiate with opposition parties to pass legislation, now the SNP-Green majority can wave it through

When I first walked through the doors of Holyrood with other newly elected MSPs almost a decade ago, the press jokingly referred it as “freshers week”. The so-called 2016 intake was made up of faces from all political parties, and we were quickly shown that getting to know each other was as important as learning the Scottish Parliament’s political ropes.

I was immediately summoned to a lunch where I sat between the SNP’s Kate Forbes and Mike Rumbles of the Liberal Democrats; the organisers wanted a political mix, a bit like when people are deliberately jumbled up at a wedding dinner. Friendships across political colours were quickly formed – we even had a WhatsApp group called “Cross Party Party” to organise social meet-ups. I was quite surprised by the level of effort being invested in this integration – but now I understand why it was so important.

It’s easy to hate people you don’t know, and the nosedive in relations and increase in toxicity across Holyrood’s benches can be traced back to the 2021 election. None of these exercises took place, largely because of Covid restrictions, which meant new MSPs only knew each other from their social media feeds – possibly the worst gauge of anyone’s true character.

There was no 'Cross Party Party' WhatsApp group for the new intake of MSPs in 2021 because of the Covid restrictions (Picture: Andrew Cowan/pool/Getty Images)

No need for persuasion

Those of us who had bonded after 2016 lost touch, and the entire arena became more tribal as a result. Another thing happened shortly after that election; the Greens were brought into government. This meant ministers no longer had to work with opposition politicians to secure votes for legislation – everything would be waved through as a formality.

Get our weekly opinion newsletter for expert analysis from The Scotsman’s team of columnists

For example, I once secured an amendment to government legislation on a renewable heating target. The SNP ministers at the time understood if they worked with me and my party on this, the vote would go through. So I was given the support of civil servants, and together we formed a decent policy which won the support of parliament – it was constructive, cross-party working in action.

This would never happen now. And with the demise in relations, the quality of debate has also dropped. No one seems interested in engagement now, and speeches are aimed at landing punches and winning cheers. Whoever gets the loudest acclaim is adjudged to have won the day. There is simply no need for persuasion.

Speeches without notes?

If trust in politicians and the wider public’s respect of the Scottish Parliament is to improve, we need solutions to both these issues. First, new entrants from opposing parties must be thrown together at the first opportunity to prove that, behind all the pantomime, they can be friends and they can work together for the good of the country.

And we need the exchanges in the chamber to be better. One suggestion I’d previously discussed with Ken Macintosh, the former presiding officer, was to have more debates in parliament where participants weren’t allowed notes – speeches would have to be made off-the-cuff. This would spell the end of dreary pre-written speeches, and force MSPs out their comfort zone by confronting their own ideas and those of others. This could be put in place now, and applied to, say, one debate a week.

There’s been no shortage of talk about changing the political culture in Scotland and the UK. But those who are elected owe it to voters to do better when it comes to turning talk into action.

Maurice Golden, Scottish Conservative MSP for North East Scotland