Alloa MSP Keith Brown cleared over Clachan Bridge code of conduct row

Keith Brown of the SNP wrote to Argyll and Bute Council's chief executive Pippa Milne in October 2025 on behalf of a constituent who claimed to have witnessed a head-on collision between a district nurse's vehicle and a van while travelling by bus on the B844 Easdale Road.

The constituent called for the 60mph limit to be reduced to 40mph and for traffic lights to be installed at the 233-year-old Clachan Bridge.

Mr Brown, who represents the Clackmannanshire and Dunblane constituency, told the local authority chief he would be "grateful" if Ms Milne could "consider my constituent's comments on this matter".

Despite figures obtained by the Guardian showing finding only three collisions at bridge between 1994 and 2004, each recorded as "slight" in severity, the council secured funding from the Scottish Government's Road Safety Infrastructure Fund to pay for the works, with costs estimated at £35,000.

Furious residents on Seil say they only learned of the lights when contractors started digging.

Local objectors argue argue that traffic lights risk making the crossing more dangerous rather than less, by giving drivers a false sense of priority over pedestrians who currently share the narrow road.

The Clachan Bridge, which links the Isle of Seil to the mainland, is the only crossing in Britain over a stretch of Atlantic ocean.

The humpback bridge is a listed Category A structure and a significant tourist attraction.

It is also in Jenni Minto's Argyll and Bute constituency.

Clachan Bridge is known as the Bridge over the Atlantic (Image: Shutterstock / John A Cameron)

The plans were first revealed in the Oban Times and the uproar was covered by the national and international press, with the French media describing the council's intentions as "la profanation", which means the act of treating something sacred, holy, or highly respected with disrespect.

Councillor Julie McKenzie's petition against the scheme now has 1,835 signatures, more than three times the population of the surrounding area.

In June, the council announced it was pausing plans to allow safety investigations to be carried out and a public consultation.

After Mr Brown's letter was uncovered through Freedom of Information, Ewan Kennedy, a retired lawyer, wrote to the Presiding Officer to say that Mr Brown had breached Section 8.4 of the Parliament's Code of Conduct, which states an MSP "must not deal with a constituency case or constituency issue outwith their constituency/region unless by prior agreement".

He told Kenneth Gibson: "Despite a warning from their Roads Department about the sensitivity of the matter, the need for consultations and consents to be obtained, and the installation actually to be designed, the Council immediately went ahead with the building work, which has since stopped.

"The local community has been strongly against the project, and extremely vocal in its responses," he added.

Mr Kennedy said the "furore [was] a clear demonstration of the wisdom behind paragraph 4 of Section 8 of the Code of Conduct, of which Mr Brown's intervention appears to be a clear breach".

Keith Brown wrote to Argyll and Bute on behalf of a constituent

However, in his response, Mr Gibson said the provision "can be open to different interpretations".

He said: "One interpretation of section 8.4 is that the requirement relating to matters arising 'outwith their constituency' is relevant only to determining whether the individual seeking assistance is a constituent of the MSP.

"On that basis, once it is established that the person is a constituent, the MSP may pursue issues on their behalf regardless of where the events or circumstances giving rise to those issues occurred.

"There is a more restrictive interpretation of section 8.4: that the matter must (a) concern a constituent of the MSP and (b) must concern something that happened in that constituency.

"On this interpretation, an MSP would require prior agreement before pursuing matters that arise outwith their constituency, even where those issues are raised by one of their own constituents.

"Mr Brown has indicated to me that he took the case forward in good faith on the basis of the former interpretation, in order to ensure that his constituent's point of view was heard.

"Having considered the wording of the Code and the circumstances of this case, I am not satisfied that this is an evident breach as the relevant provision is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation."

Taking to Facebook, local resident, and former SNP MSP, Mike McKenzie hit out at Mr Gibson's decision, which he said risked "bringing the office of Presiding Officer and of the Scottish Parliament into disrepute" when it was "already at a fairly low ebb".

"It makes me sad that Scotland the country of the enlightenment has come to this. I'm sorry to say also that I no longer have much faith in the politicians of the Party that I used to be a member of."

Mr Brown told The Herald he was "pleased that the Presiding Officer has dismissed this complaint".

He said: "My responsibility as an MSP is to represent the people who elect me. The issues that affect my constituents do not stop at the Clackmannanshire and Dunblane constituency boundary, and neither should my willingness to help them.

"Since the Scottish Parliament was established, it has been the accepted practice that MSPs represent their own constituents, regardless of where the events giving rise to their concerns occurred.

"Every day, MSPs across Scotland help constituents with matters involving hospitals, councils, transport providers, planning issues and public bodies beyond their own constituency boundaries.

"The Code of Conduct is clear that MSPs have a duty to represent their own constituents while not taking over the constituency work of another member.

"Those principles are entirely compatible.

"In this case, I was contacted by one of my own constituents and acted on their behalf. Had they approached the local MSP instead, they would rightly have been directed back to me, as is the established practice.

"I welcome the clarity this decision provides and remain committed to representing my constituents wherever an issue affects their lives.”