Michael Matheson MSP

Welcome to Michael Matheson MSP's biography pages

Michael Matheson MSP

Here you can find out about your MSPs' political activities and how to get in touch with them.

  • Member for: Falkirk West
  • Region: Central Scotland
  • Party: Scottish National Party

Michael is a member of the following Committees:

Michael is a member of the following Cross-Party Groups:

Parliamentary Activities

Search for other Speeches made by The Minister for Public Health (Michael Matheson)

Meeting of the Parliament 08 October 2014 : Wednesday, October 08, 2014
The Minister for Public Health (Michael Matheson)

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I congratulate Jackie Baillie on securing time for this important debate. A number of contributions have been very interesting and thoughtful. I offer my thanks to Robert Watson for submitting his petition to Parliament last November, and for the work in the Muscular Dystrophy Campaign’s “Give us a break—Hospice and respite care for young disabled adults in Scotland” report and Action Duchenne’s “What About Us?” report.

I fully recognise the important value that respite breaks offer to young people in particular, not just in providing a break for the people who regularly care for them, but in giving those young people an opportunity to socialise and mix with individuals of their own age group. We need to ensure that that can take place in an age-appropriate setting.

I will digress slightly. Providing that type of respite for young disabled people across the country is not a new challenge. There has been a long-standing challenge in providing good, high-quality respite for young people with disabilities in a range of settings. For example, Red Cross house in Inverness traditionally had a very good reputation for providing that for individuals in the Highlands. I had experience of that in my previous role. There was also the Sue Ryder centre in West Lothian, which provided specialist care for young people with conditions such as multiple sclerosis for whom it was not appropriate to go into a nursing home or a hospital setting. Many of those facilities do not exist now, and there continues to be a challenge in being able to meet the necessary respite needs of young people with a disability.

I recognise in particular the important role that respite can provide to those with life-limiting conditions, such as muscular dystrophy. Jim Eadie highlighted the important value that such respite provision can have, as did Jackson Carlaw. It was made very clear how important young people feel that that can be. That is why it is also about ensuring that we deliver respite to young people in the right way. It must be person centred, safe and effective for them. Achieving that is not simply a case of the Government deciding what should happen; it is about working with the right stakeholders. That requires concerted effort.

Several members, including Nanette Milne and Chic Brodie, mentioned the opportunity that comes from the integration of health and social care through joint commissioning between local authorities and health boards and how they deliver services to ensure that they reflect much more the needs of their community. Some of the joint work that will be taken forward will give us an opportunity to achieve greater joined-up working in the area. Another option is self-directed support. That gives people the opportunity to take forward appropriate care in a manner that they feel is best suited to them.

I return to the important value that many people have found in CHAS. I, too, have visited CHAS and I acknowledge that it is not a mournful place in any way, as Jackie Baillie said. It is a cheery and very empowering place. It is empowering for those who use its facilities and it is an extremely rewarding place for both individuals and families, because of the fantastic care that it provides.

I understand and recognise the challenges that we now face as healthcare provision improves through the greater provision of, or improvements in, medication and health technology. That provides us with a challenge with those who have life-limiting conditions and are now living longer. That is a good challenge for us to have, but I recognise that we need to face up to it and address it much more effectively.

I am sure that no member would wish to give the impression that, since the petition that I mentioned was submitted, the Scottish Government has not undertaken any work in the area to try to address the matter. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing, Alex Neil, stated in his letter to the Health and Sport Committee and a letter to Jackie Baillie that a number of actions are being taken. For example, officials have been gathering information from our carer information strategy leads on NHS boards and our local authorities. That information indicates that pockets of very good work are being undertaken, but it also highlights other areas in which there is a lack of consistency across the country. There are deficiencies as well.

We have been working with COSLA and we are gathering information in three key areas. We are advanced in the process of establishing Scottish data to determine the scale of the issue, so that we properly understand the numbers. The numbers are small, but we need to understand them to move forward. We are also mapping the bed capacity and the quality of existing services. There is CHAS, but there are other options. We need to look at the different models and map them effectively. The other important work that we are undertaking is analysis of the economic evidence relating to running a bespoke service. We are taking forward a range of work.

Members have made comments and raised issues tonight in what seems to be frustration with what may appear to be a lack of progress in action on this issue. In the desire to be as helpful as I can, I undertake to convene a meeting with the interested parties to look at what more we can do to move the issue to the next stage. Where that will take us will depend on the evidence and information that we have gathered, but I hope that members will be assured that the cabinet secretary and I are interested in this matter. If it offers members—and those who are listening in the public gallery—further assurance, I will convene a meeting to look at where we are and what further steps are needed to drive the issue forward.

It is in everyone’s interests to ensure that the young disabled people in our communities receive the best support and have the opportunity to lead as fulfilling and as full a life as possible.

Meeting closed at 18:42.  

Meeting of the Parliament 02 October 2014 : Thursday, October 02, 2014
The Minister for Public Health (Michael Matheson)

The Scottish Government has been working closely with Health Protection Scotland to minimise the risk of an outbreak of ebola virus in Scotland. I have met experts from HPS to discuss these issues.

The national health service in Scotland already has well-established and effective protocols for dealing with highly infectious diseases, but updated and revised professional guidance for healthcare workers has been issued in light of this outbreak. In particular, general practitioners and front-line healthcare workers have been advised that they must be extra vigilant when dealing with patients who have recently travelled to affected areas.

Scottish Government officials continue to take part in weekly United Kingdom teleconferences to monitor the outbreak and levels of preparedness, and Scottish Government officials are also directly involved in regular international teleconferences to ensure that we have the most up-to-date information.

The level of risk posed to Scotland by ebola continues to be very low, but we are not complacent and will respond accordingly if the risk increases.

Meeting of the Parliament 02 October 2014 : Thursday, October 02, 2014
Michael Matheson

The member makes a good point. Some progress has been made in some of the affected countries, but there are countries in which the risk continues to increase. Therefore, we must be vigilant in how we continue to deal with the matter. I can inform the member that Health Protection Scotland has been engaging with the oil industry in the north-east on the potential risks to workers who operate on the west coast of Africa and has been discussing a range of measures that the industry should consider taking to ensure that its personnel are properly protected. It has also discussed the need for the industry to have in place appropriate measures to ensure that, when individuals return to Scotland, they have appropriate support, if necessary, should they find themselves unwell.

Meeting of the Parliament 02 October 2014 : Thursday, October 02, 2014
The Minister for Public Health (Michael Matheson)

I am pleased to open the debate on the general principles of the Food (Scotland) Bill. I thank those who gave evidence, both written and in person, and the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, the Finance Committee and the Health and Sport Committee for their detailed scrutiny of the bill at stage 1. In particular, I welcome the latter’s support for the bill’s general principles and I have recently responded to its stage 1 report.

The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that people in Scotland live longer, healthier lives. Making sure that we eat a good, nutritious diet of safe food is vital to achieving that ambition. Food-borne diseases cost Scotland £140 million per year. Most significantly, of the 130,000 consumers who contract food-borne diseases each year, around 2,000 will be hospitalised and around 50 will die.

Bad eating habits are one of the most significant causes of ill health in Scotland and a major factor in obesity. Scotland is positioned near the top of the league tables for obesity in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. The public cost of dealing with obesity could rise to £3 billion per year by 2030, so even relatively minor improvements to the safety and standards of food in Scotland will have significant social and economic benefits.

The Food (Scotland) Bill will give Scotland some of the levers that we can use to tackle those issues. First, the bill will create food standards Scotland, which will be Scotland’s independent food safety and standards body. We are working to appoint a board and chair of high calibre, with the range of experience and skills required to guide food standards Scotland. We are also in the process of recruiting its first chief executive. Subject to the bill’s progress, we aim to identify the chair early this month, identify the chief executive by the end of the month and appoint the remainder of the board to a shadow body by the end of November.

As food standards Scotland will be a non-ministerial body, operating free from ministers’ influence, the board and chief executive will need sufficient space to prepare and develop their strategic thinking and build key relationships with partners in time for FSS being up and running in April 2015.

Food standards Scotland’s clear objectives, as set out in the bill by ministers and Parliament, will be to develop and help others develop policies on food and animal feedstuffs; advise the Scottish Government, other authorities and the public on food and animal feedstuffs; keep the public and users of animal feedstuffs advised, to help them make informed decisions about food and animal feedstuffs; and monitor the performance of enforcement authorities in enforcing food legislation.

The bill sets out specific duties and associated powers for the new body on acquiring and reviewing information through carrying out observations and inspections, monitoring developments and carrying out, commissioning and co-ordinating research.

The bill will allow the body to set performance standards for enforcement authorities—mainly local authorities—in enforcing food legislation in Scotland.

Once the bill establishes the body, we will constitute it separately by order as a non-ministerial office in the Scottish Administration. As such, food standards Scotland will be fully accountable to the Scottish Parliament and autonomous of the Scottish Government.

Food standards Scotland will take on all the functions that are currently exercised in Scotland by the Scottish division of the United Kingdom-wide Food Standards Agency. For some years now, the remit of that division has been wider than the remit south of the border; in 2010, the UK Government removed responsibility for labelling and nutrition policy from the FSA’s English arm, while in Scotland, we maintained the link between those aspects and food safety. The UK decision was subsequently seen as a factor in hindering the UK Government’s response to the horsemeat scandal in 2013.

The horsemeat scandal demonstrated the importance of having a single body with clear responsibility for all aspects of food safety and standards. Indeed, it was the UK Government’s decision that led us to review the FSA’s work in Scotland. In March 2012, Professor Jim Scudamore, a former UK chief veterinary officer, published his report on the issue. His review concluded that food safety should not be divorced from nutrition and labelling; that advice on those subjects should be independent, evidence based and consumer focused; and that advice on food safety and nutrition should come from a body at arm’s length from the Scottish ministers.

Meeting of the Parliament 02 October 2014 : Thursday, October 02, 2014
Michael Matheson

An important thing that will be achieved with the creation of FSS is that we will have a body that can co-ordinate how we tackle nutrition issues and change people’s diets to ensure that their diets and lifestyles are healthier. We cannot achieve that at present because that work is undertaken by a range of agencies. FSS will be able to take a much more co-ordinated approach to issues such as the one highlighted by Stewart Stevenson than is possible at the moment. We took forward the key recommendation in Professor Jim Scudamore’s report that we establish a specific food safety body in Scotland, and that has led to the legislation before us today, which creates food standards Scotland.

The bill introduces new food law provisions that are designed to protect and improve public health and other consumer interests by driving up hygiene standards and reducing the incidence of food-borne disease; by providing safeguards against food standards incidents such as the horsemeat food fraud; and by strengthening and simplifying the penalties regime for breaches of food law. Those arrangements will increase consumer and investor confidence and will help make Scotland an even more attractive place for food businesses.

The bill also provides for powers to seize and detain food that does not comply with food information law, and those powers will align food information powers more closely with existing food safety powers. Currently, unsafe food can be seized or detained, and courts must order its destruction. However, there are no such powers for food that is safe but which does not comply with food information requirements. In light of the horsemeat food fraud incidents, the power to seize or detain food that does not meet food information requirements in respect of, for example, labelling will help to eliminate food fraud. Without such a power, a food business might still be able to pass on food that does not comply with food information law.

The bill also creates a statutory offence of failure to report breaches of food information law. The provision will more closely align food standards requirements with the existing duty to report breaches of food safety legislation. Under the proposed arrangements, it will become an offence for a food business to fail to notify food standards Scotland if it suspects that food that has been placed on the market does not comply with food information law.

The bill provides for the introduction at some point in future, by regulation, of a statutory scheme for the mandatory display by food businesses of hygiene inspection outcomes. The intention is to drive up food hygiene standards and reduce the incidence of food-borne disease. The voluntary food hygiene information scheme is already in place, and almost all local authorities in Scotland have launched it locally.

A similar scheme has been introduced in England and Wales, and a similar scheme is being introduced in Northern Ireland. We will monitor developments in that regard, with a view to creating a statutory scheme in Scotland. For that reason, the food law provisions in the bill give the Scottish ministers the power to introduce a statutory scheme after fuller consultation.

The bill includes provision for the Scottish ministers to regulate animal feeding stuffs and their production, retaining ministers’ existing powers under the Food Standards Act 1999, through a delegated power for ministers to use when existing delegated powers might not be sufficient. The existing powers have not been used in the UK since 1999, but we think that they should be retained so that everything possible is in place to guard against feed incidents.

The bill streamlines Scotland’s food law enforcement regime by providing for administrative sanctions, so that people who commit offences can be dealt with more quickly and at less cost. The administrative sanctions regime, which consists of compliance notices and fixed penalties, will give enforcement officers more flexibility to deal appropriately with food offences.

The option to use administrative penalties will reduce the burden on the courts and will reduce local authorities’ costs in relation to prosecuting through the court system. The approach will give enforcement authorities a wider and more proportionate set of tools from which to choose when they deal with contraventions of food law.

In evidence to the Health and Sport Committee it was suggested that there should be an appeals process for people who are given fixed-penalty notices. We are considering the proposal and we are working closely with stakeholders to develop a transparent and consistent process for resolving disputes.

The arrangements on enforcement and improvement were recommended to the Scottish Government by the independent expert advisory group that reported on the lessons to be learned for Scotland from the 2013 horsemeat food fraud scandal.

The recommendations on seizure of food, food hygiene information and administrative sanctions were made last year by the Food Standards Agency in Scotland, following a public consultation on new food law provisions.

We intend to lodge a small number of Government amendments in light of the stage 1 proceedings to date. As members of the Health and Sport Committee are aware, they include amendment of the definition of “food” to reflect the recently amended definition in the Scotland Act 1998. We also intend to implement the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee’s recommendation that we restrict the power to regulate animal feeding stuffs in section 34 by lodging an amendment whose effect will be to cap the maximum penalty level for an offence that is created by use of the power.

The bill will ensure that food safety in Scotland is given the prominence that it deserves by establishing food standards Scotland and equipping it with the necessary functions and powers, so that it can make expedient decisions on issues that specifically affect Scotland and take action to improve the diet of the people of Scotland.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Food (Scotland) Bill.

Meeting of the Parliament 02 October 2014 : Thursday, October 02, 2014
Michael Matheson

I thank everyone for their contributions to the debate. A range of very good points has been made. I welcome the broad cross-party support for the establishment of food standards Scotland and for the bill.

Duncan McNeil set out in a very fair way the broad areas that the legislation will provide for, and he rightly highlighted the various views that exist on the creation of food standards Scotland. I recognise that not everyone in the sector believes that its creation is the right thing to do for their particular purpose, although the vast majority believe that it is the right thing to do. However, I am sure that all members recognise that we have arrived at this particular point not because of a failing on the part of the FSA but because of changes that have taken place elsewhere and because the expert group—not just Professor Jim Scudamore, but also the other representatives on his expert group—came back with the recommendation on how we need to respond to the matter. We took that on board and introduced the bill.

We have therefore arrived where we are with very good reason, and it is incumbent on us to ensure that we take the bill forward in an appropriate way. We will ensure that we get the provision on food safety in Scotland that we require.

Duncan McNeil made a number of very important points about where FSS needs to sit with the rest of the regulatory bodies and functions that already exist. Its partnerships with the FSA in the rest of the UK and other representative organisations in the rest of Europe and beyond are absolutely critical. Alongside that, there are our local authorities, health boards, producers and retailers and the roles that they all have in food safety and production in Scotland. FSS has an important role to play, and we will need to ensure that it fulfils it effectively and in an appropriate way.

I hope that members are reassured by the memorandum of understanding on a range of issues that we are taking forward with the UK Government. I believe that it will be a very productive way for us to continue what has been, from the process that we have gone through to establish food standards Scotland, very cordial and responsive engagement with each other in taking the whole area of policy forward.

Richard Simpson and a number of other members raised the very important issue of dietary improvement and how FSS can assist in co-ordinating the whole approach to tackling dietary issues and improving nutrition. We made provision in the bill to give FSS a very clear strategic role that no other body in the country currently has in order to help to drive that agenda forward.

Richard Simpson made a very good point about the need to tackle issues related to salt, sugar and fat in our diet. The FSA has taken forward a range of work over a number of years in which it has made progress. For example, it would be fair to say that many of our big supermarket retailers, including Asda and Tesco, have adjusted and reformulated their own products to reduce things such as salt, fat and sugar in their products.

We have made less progress with branded products. Indeed, I think that we are getting to the point at which we must ensure that retailers recognise that they are part of the solution in dealing with our nutritional challenges and dietary problems in Scotland, and in tackling obesity. The issue is a societal one, and our retailers and food producers have to play their part in helping to overcome it. FSS has an important role in helping us to ensure that that happens effectively in Scotland.

Richard Simpson and several other members raised the issue of the potentially wider remit of FSS. When we decided to take forward the bill, I was clear that I wanted to protect our reputational integrity in Scotland for good food products, and I wanted to ensure that we protected the first-class work that is currently taken forward by the FSA in Scotland to ensure that there was no loss of public confidence as we moved to a new public body.

That is why we have taken a cautious approach. We have done so to ensure that we get the things that the FSA does just now right in the new body so that there is no question about its role and people having confidence in it. We have created a footprint in the bill that allows us to expand and develop the body as we move forward.

If we do that, we will rightly have to look at the resource implications, to which members have referred. Nanette Milne referred to obesity and nutrition and she touched on funding. It is important to recognise that we already fund the Scottish proportion of the FSA’s activity. We fund it at Scottish level and we pay a central amount to the UK body for some of the centralised roles that it undertakes. Therefore, the budget for the FSA in Scotland is already part of the Scottish Government’s health budget, and it will go to FSS.

The issue on which we are still in negotiation is moving some of those centralised functions that we already pay for into the Scottish organisation. I am confident that we will reach an agreement on that. I assure members that FSS will have the budgets that are required for it to undertake the functions that the FSA presently undertakes. If we choose to change those functions, the Government of the day, of whatever party, will have to consider the resource implications.

Aileen McLeod highlighted the importance of research in the food and animal health sector. As a number of members rightly pointed out, it is important that FSS can participate in research programmes at UK level. It is also important that we have access to expert advice, as we intend and have agreed with the FSA, but it is equally important that we provide access to the expert advice that comes from Scotland. As Lewis Macdonald highlighted, Scotland already provides expert advice on nutrition and dietary issues and, in particular, on shellfish and E coli, and our intention is for that to continue. We also intend that we will be able to participate in research programmes at European level, where there is a range of work to which we can contribute.

Claire Baker raised the issue of an employee director. That is a good and fair point to which we are sympathetic given our track record on health bodies, which have an employee director appointed to the board by ministers. The reason why we cannot make a decision on that now is that we do not have a chief executive, a chair and a board in place, but I reassure the member that, given our track record with present health bodies, I would like that approach to be reflected in FSS, because an employee director can have a valuable role in a national organisation.

Claire Baker also raised a valid point about EROs, our environmental health officers. I should say EHOs, not EROs—that is what happens when you get caught up in referendums. The administrative fixed-penalty regime will help to relieve some of the burden on our EHOs. When they want to take forward an issue, that often involves a report to the procurator fiscal, submitting further reports and then a wait for the matter to go to court. It can sometimes take more than a year or two before a case even gets to court. The fixed-penalty scheme will allow us to release some of that burden, which is why some of our EHOs have welcomed the measure. It will allow them to be much more responsive and to move on to other issues.

We also have to consider the testing that our EHOs undertake. We can use different models for that. We could have testing that is controlled more centrally by FSS, working with local authorities and funding them for the purpose of undertaking the testing. However, we need to ensure that we have good data collection at national level. There are a variety of options that we can consider pursuing to help to address some of the issues.

A number of members talked about an appeals mechanism for the fixed-penalty scheme. We have to be careful not to get into a situation in which there is an expectation that every fixed-penalty notice can be appealed, as that could draw the whole system to a halt because of repeated appeals.

At present, if someone is stopped by the police and offered a fixed-penalty notice for a driving offence, they have the right to refuse that. If they refuse it, a report goes to the procurator fiscal and eventually the matter will go to court, where the person can then argue their case.

There is an element in this process that, if someone is issued with a fixed penalty notice and they disagree with the EHO, they can refuse it. The matter would then go to the procurator fiscal and the fixed penalty notice could be challenged in court. We need transparency and a consistent approach from local authority to local authority to how the measures are applied. However, I strike a note of caution to those who call for an overall process of appeal.

I have not been able to go through all members’ very valuable points, but we will consider them as we move forward with the bill. I want to finish with this point: our staff in the FSA in Aberdeen do a fantastic job for us. I am very proud of the job that they have done over a number of years. This has been a difficult time for them, with the uncertainty of moving to a new body. I am sure that all members will want Parliament to send out a clear message that we value their work and that, as we move towards establishing food standards Scotland, we will make sure that they will be able to continue to undertake that valuable work.

Meeting of the Parliament 24 September 2014 : Wednesday, September 24, 2014
The Minister for Public Health (Michael Matheson)

We intend to introduce a carers bill that will extend and strengthen the rights of adult carers and young carers to help to ensure that they are much better supported.

We will continue to provide support to carers and young carers, investing nearly £114 million between 2007 and 2015 in a range of programmes and initiatives. That includes funding for carers initiatives through the reshaping care for older people change fund, providing funding to national health service boards for their carer information strategies and funding the voluntary sector short breaks fund.

Subject to parliamentary approval, we will invest a further £5 million in NHS boards’ carer information strategies and a further £3 million in the short breaks fund in 2015-16.

Meeting of the Parliament 24 September 2014 : Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Michael Matheson

I am aware that, as James Dornan highlights, the carers allowance is one of the lowest income-based benefits in the UK welfare system. Of course, during the referendum campaign, we set out clearly the need to tackle that and for an increase in the allowance. I add my voice to call on the UK Government to consider reviewing the overall level of carers allowance, which at times has felt as though it is the forgotten benefit for carers.

We should recognise the significant contribution that carers make to our society and acknowledge the fact that, if they did not provide that support, the cost to the taxpayer would be significantly more. They deserve not only practical support but financial support.

Meeting of the Parliament 24 September 2014 : Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Michael Matheson

Rhoda Grant will be aware that the Scottish Youth Parliament has made a number of recommendations on support for young carers, particularly in relation to the education maintenance allowance. My colleague Angela Constance made some changes to the guidance to reflect how the EMA should be provided to reflect the issues that the Scottish Youth Parliament raised. My colleague Mike Russell is due to meet representatives from the Scottish Youth Parliament to discuss those issues in more detail.

We are taking forward a range of measures under the carers policy to help to support young people in schools and in further and higher education. My colleagues on the education side are also considering what measures they can introduce, including whether they can take further actions under the EMA to provide further support to young carers in education.

Meeting of the Parliament 24 September 2014 : Wednesday, September 24, 2014
The Minister for Public Health (Michael Matheson)

The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition published its draft report for consultation on the links between intakes of carbohydrates, including sugars, and health on 26 June 2014.

The advisory committee report referred to evidence suggesting that sugary drinks are associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes in adults. The report shows that diets that are high in sugar can contribute to excess calorie intake, which, if sustained, leads to weight gain and obesity. If an individual is overweight or obese, they are more prone to a range of serious health problems, including type 2 diabetes.

The Food Standards Agency in Scotland will review Scottish dietary advice, based on the report’s final recommendations early in 2015.

Vote DetailMSP VoteResult

S4M-11123 Joe FitzPatrick on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau: Business Motion—That the Parliament
>> Show more

S4M-11114.2 Kenny MacAskill: Policing—As an amendment to motion S4M-11114 in the name of Graeme Pear
>> Show more

S4M-11114 Graeme Pearson: Policing—That the Parliament acknowledges that policing in Scotland contin
>> Show more

S4M-11116.1.1 Patrick Harvie: Scotland’s Future—As an amendment to amendment S4M-11116.1 in the name
>> Show more

S4M-11116.1 Nicola Sturgeon: Scotland’s Future—As an amendment to motion S4M-11116 in the name of Jo
>> Show more

S4M-11116 Johann Lamont: Scotland’s Future—That the Parliament recognises the result of the independ
>> Show more

Amendment 61 moved by Elaine Murray on motion S4M-11101 Kenny MacAskill: Courts Reform (Scotland) Bi
>> Show more

Amendment 62 moved by Margaret Mitchell on motion S4M-11101 Kenny MacAskill: Courts Reform (Scotland
>> Show more

Amendment 63 moved by Margaret Mitchell on motion S4M-11101 Kenny MacAskill: Courts Reform (Scotland
>> Show more

Amendment 64 moved by Margaret Mitchell on motion S4M-11101 Kenny MacAskill: Courts Reform (Scotland
>> Show more

Search for other Motions lodged by Michael Matheson
EventIdTypeSub TypeMSP NameParty NameConstituencyRegionTitleItemTextFormattedAnswer DateAnswerStatusIdExpectedAnswerDateAnsweredByMspApprovedDateSubmissionDateMeetingDateProductionStatusIdRecordStatusIdStatus DateOnBehalfOfConsideredForMembersBusinessCrossPartySupportRegisteredInterestSupportCountSupportDateIsEventLinkCurrentMinister
Motion S4M-11048: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 30/09/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-10414: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 19/06/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-09803: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 24/04/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-09558.2: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 01/04/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-09446: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 24/03/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-09254: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 06/03/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-08837: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 24/01/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-08800: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 20/01/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-07787: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 23/09/2013 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-06995: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 13/06/2013 Show Full Motion >>
This Member currently holds a ministerial post. First Minister and Ministers cannot ask the Government questions which is why no recent questions are displaying here. Please use the full search to find details of previous questions by this Member.
EventIdTypeSub TypeMSP NameParty NameConstituencyRegionTitleItemTextFormattedAnswer DateAnswerStatusIdExpectedAnswerDateAnsweredByMspApprovedDateSubmissionDateMeetingDateProductionStatusIdRecordStatusIdStatus DateOnBehalfOfConsideredForMembersBusinessCrossPartySupportRegisteredInterestSupportCountSupportDateIsEventLinkCurrentMinister
Question S3W-40158: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40152: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40160: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40159: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40154: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40157: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40156: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-40155: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 03/03/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-39739: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 21/02/2011 Show Full Question >>
Question S3W-39064: Michael Matheson, Falkirk West, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 26/01/2011 Show Full Question >>

Further information

Email our Public Information Service for more information.