Back to the Scottish Parliament Business Bulletin No. 67/2007: Monday 14 May 2007
Archive Home

Business Bulletin 1999-2011

Minutes of Proceedings 1999-2011

Journal of Parliamentary Proceedings Sessions 1 & 2

Committees Sessions 1, 2 & 3

Annual reports

Contents An A B C D E F G H I J

Section F – Motions and Amendments

Motions and amendments are normally only printed the day after the day on which they are lodged and then with the complete list of motions and amendments lodged the previous week which is published in this section of the Bulletin every Monday. That list also contains any motions lodged for debate in the forthcoming week.

Where the text of a motion or amendment is altered, the motion or amendment is re-printed with the changes marked by asterisks in the text.

Where a motion or amendment attracts additional support after it is first published, that additional support is shown separately at the end of this section.

Motions eligible for consideration for debate as members’ business in the Parliament are marked with a hash symbol (#).

Motions submitted for members’ business in the Parliament but which have not yet received the requisite cross-party support are marked with a diamond symbol (♦).

Motions in which a member has indicated a declarable interest are marked with an "R".

An indication is also provided where motions and amendments have been withdrawn.

A full list of current motions is available to view each Monday in paper copy at the Chamber Desk or alternatively on the Scottish Parliament web site at Current Motions

(http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/motionsAndAmendments/motions.htm). A search facility is also available on the Scottish Parliament web site at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/motionsAndAmendments/index.htm

New and altered motions and amendments

S3M-5 Christine Grahame: Galashiels Crown Post Office—That the Parliament expresses its concern at the closure of the Crown post office in Galashiels and its relocation into WH Smith, Galashiels; notes that thousands have signed a petition opposing the closure which is detrimental to the needs of both individuals and businesses, diminishes the service and flies in the face of the recent economic growth in Galashiels founded partly on the re-instatement of the railway line, and affirms that this is a further example of why the Scottish Parliament must extend its powers to ensure that decisions about vital services such as the post office network, including both Crown and sub post offices, are made at a Scottish level.

Supported by: Stefan Tymkewycz, Mr Adam Ingram, Rob Gibson, Jamie Hepburn, Brian Adam, Alasdair Allan

S3M-4 Mike Pringle: Low Limit for Small Claims Courts—That the Parliament notes that the issue of Scotland’s low limit for small claims courts is yet to be resolved and calls on a new Scottish Executive to address this issue as a matter of urgency to allow consumers to get the quick and effective justice they deserve.

S3M-3# Iain Smith: Relocation of St Andrews Post Office—That the Parliament expresses its concern about the plans to close a number of Crown post offices in Scotland and relocate them in branches of WH Smith; opposes the proposed closure of the post office in St Andrews; recognises that the existing post office already finds it difficult to cope with the volume of customers and that St Andrews has a unique population with a high level of students, many from overseas, and the tourist trade, both of which suggest the need to retain a full range of post office services that can only be provided by a full Crown post office; believes that the premises of WH Smith are inadequate to cope with the addition of the post office business, and considers that the Post Office should hold genuine consultation with the local community and businesses in St Andrews before progressing further with this proposal.

Supported by: Robin Harper, Jim Tolson, Hugh O’Donnell

S3M-2 Elaine Smith: Monklands General Hospital—That the Parliament recognises the opposition of the people of the Monklands area to NHS Lanarkshire’s proposal to downgrade Monklands General Hospital; believes that health service reconfiguration decisions should be based on the health and social needs of the people of Lanarkshire, weighted for the impact on reducing social and health inequalities, and not narrow financial considerations; further believes that the financial information provided to the NHS board as a basis for its decision was flawed; notes that the decision was reached after a consultation which was launched with a preferred option to downgrade Monklands and which dismissed 50,000 signatures, ignored the articulate comments made at public meetings and did not reflect the content of the many comprehensive submissions made; finds it incredible that NHS Lanarkshire is proposing to downgrade its busiest, most efficient and effective accident and emergency department, located in the area serving over half the population of Lanarkshire which suffers from some of the poorest health in Scotland alongside high levels of poverty and deprivation; notes that Wishaw and Hairmyres hospitals close to accident and emergency admissions much more frequently than Monklands; believes that a reduction in capacity by downgrading Monklands can only exacerbate that situation and increase the pressure on neighbouring hospitals, and believes that the clearly expressed wishes of the people of Monklands in the consultation phase, after the decision was made and during the recent election campaign, must be acted on by having this iniquitous decision reversed as soon as possible.

Supported by: Jamie Hepburn

Contents An A B C D E F G H I J