The best check on MSPs who fail to handle their constituents' cases properly is to vote them out at the next election, according to Holyrood's standards commissioner.
Dr Jim Dyer told a committee of MSPs yesterday that he thinks it is impossible to judge whether politicians are doing an adequate job according to objective standards.
He said his standards commissioner role, which was reformed only last year, should be limited to handling only matters of probity or financial wrongdoing.
He argued that if MSPs fail to be accessible or to deal with constituents' matters conscientiously, a complaint should be made to their party leaders.
The most effective way of responding to an MSP who is not doing his or her job adequately is to vote them out of office, he told the standards, procedures and public appointments committee.
"They are there to do a job which is paid for from public funds but they are not employees of the parliament," he said. "They cannot be held to a strict job description that says you must deal with constituents problems in certain ways, you must answer letters within such and such a time as an employee might be.
"They are answerable to the electorate and therefore I think the standards system should be reserved for issues of propriety and conduct, issues of transparency over financial interests and that sort of thing."
His comments followed cases in which members of the public had expected him to "pull an MSP aside in a headmasterly way and tell them to pursue an issue".
Dr Dyer told MSPs: "I think that's a matter properly for the democratic process, for the ballot box".
The Rev Graham Blount, of the Scottish churches parliamentary office, told the committee it was inappropriate to provide "black and white" rules over dealing with complaints.
Unlike Dr Dyer, he said elections were not an adequate check on MSPs and that there should be a complaints system, leaving the Presiding Officer to reach a judgment on individual cases.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article