Published: 07:31, 23 August 2026
At a time when many politicians around the world have changed the way in which they behave in public office (and not always for the better) the intensive parliamentary compliance training I have received, since joining our parliament, has been both impressive and reassuring.
The parliamentary and ministerial codes, which I am held to, are based on a fundamental principle that the individuals acting within the parliament are held to account for their behaviour. A key element of these requirements, which applies to all Scottish Ministers, is that my dual roles of being an MSP and being Scotland’s minister for public finance, must be kept separate.
Government ministers cannot make decisions on projects or policies specific to their own constituency. This is a good thing and prevents ministers from being able to use their powers to unfairly benefit their own constituency. This is particularly relevant to my ministerial portfolio, which covers planning at a Scottish level.
Why then is a seat at the table a good thing for Shetland, when such restrictions are in place? The answer is simple. An MSP, who is not a minister, would act as a backbencher. This is an important role, powering the parliamentary ship forward, but it is a role with less influence than that of a minister, who can steer policy by influencing their parliamentary colleagues, from within, at the highest level.
A backbench MSP who is not of the governing party, would have even less influence and so my ministerial role is an important opportunity for Shetland.
What these restrictions also do not prevent, is a minister holding a strong and impassioned view that the more local the development, the more local the decision-making body should be. This is particularly true regarding choices made about the future of energy production. The feeling that we, as islanders, have insufficient control over the consenting process for energy developments in our Islands, is one that I share.
As part of the current government, I now have the opportunity to push for more control for communities in Scotland (including Shetland), by making changes to the planning and consent processes.
In my opinion, community benefit is no longer enough, and we must start to think of who ultimately can lay most claim to owning Shetland’s natural resources. We may need help to develop these assets into viable energy for our homes and business, but they should no longer be seen as free for the taking.'
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.