As always, the debate on Scottish independence is one that provokes great passion and emotion from all those that take part.
This time, the most emotional was Malcolm Offord, leader of Reform UK in Scotland. However, in showing his rather emotional response to the debate, the West of Scotland MSP and his 16 colleagues in the chamber committed a cardinal sin in parliamentary representation: they abandoned their democratic duty.
The walkout
MSPs took to the debating chamber in Holyrood to debate the First Minister’s motion: “Scotland is a nation that has a right to decide its own future.” Parliament voted 84 to 18 in favour of the motion, with minor amendments, with the Scottish National Party (SNP), the Scottish Greens and Scottish Labour all backing it. The Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Liberal Democrats opposed the motion.
However, Reform UK were not present for the vote, having walked out of the chamber close to the start of the debate.
Malcolm Offord accused the debate of being an SNP “vanity project” and withdrew an amendment he had planned to put forward before leading the entire Reform group out of the chamber. Before the debate had even started, Offord tried to shut it down twice but was rejected by the Presiding Officer.
The Presiding Officer, Kenneth Gibson, described the walkout as “a gross discourtesy to all members of the chamber”.
Not just Reform
To say drama on this level was a first for the Scottish Parliament, however, would be incorrect.
Although there hasn’t been an actual walkout before Reform’s dramatic exit on 22 September, something just as big almost happened 23 years ago.
In 2003, up to 20 MSPs, including all six Scottish Socialist Party MSPs and a number of SNP MSPs, threatened to boycott Queen Elizabeth II’s third visit to Holyrood to mark the opening of Parliament. Then SNP deputy leader, Roseanna Cunningham, said “I do not believe the monarchy has any role in Scottish politics”.
Scottish Socialist Party MSP Rosie Kane said: “The Queen coming means less than nothing to me. It is just another load of pomp and ceremony that secures the monarchy in the parliament, and, quite frankly, there is no place for the monarchy in the parliament.”
Dereliction of democratic duty
It doesn’t matter whether, in an MSP’s eyes, a motion is a “vanity project” or whether a monarch should have a role in Scottish politics. For an elected representative to walk out or boycott is to let down their constituents by removing their voice from parliament and to let down their country by failing to contribute to the important issues affecting it.
In the most recent instance, the Reform group failed to stand up for, not only the over 300,000 people who voted for them, but all the people they were elected to represent when they won their seats in the election. Those people’s voices on Scottish independence and on Scotland’s right to decide went unheard thanks to their own party and elected MSPs.
Being an elected MSP means more than just winning an election. It is a solemn oath, a contract, to the people of wherever the MSP is elected to that they will serve them to the best of their ability at all times. This includes both the Scottish Parliament and the constituency. To walk out of parliament in protest to any given issue is to betray that oath and break that contract. Whether a politician agrees with the parliamentary business or not, the best thing they can do for their people is to remain in the chamber and engage with the process and discussion.
