Scotland's Justice Secretary, Angela Constance, has narrowly survived a vote of no confidence in Holyrood following a fierce political row over her comments about a leading expert on grooming gangs.
The Vote and Its Outcome
The motion, held on Tuesday 16 December 2025, was defeated by 67 votes to 57, with one abstention. Scottish Labour, the Scottish Conservatives, and the Scottish Liberal Democrats united in an attempt to oust the cabinet secretary. However, their efforts were blocked by the combined backing of the governing SNP and the Scottish Greens, who form a cooperation agreement at Holyrood.
The controversy centres on claims that Ms Constance misrepresented the views of Professor Alexis Jay, who led the landmark inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham, and in doing so, misled the Scottish Parliament.
The Heart of the Controversy
The dispute stems from a debate on the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill in September. During that session, Ms Constance rejected a Scottish Conservative amendment calling for a public inquiry into grooming gangs in Scotland. She insisted that Professor Jay agreed with her position that such a probe was unnecessary.
This assertion was thrown into doubt last week when the Scottish government released emails showing that Professor Jay had subsequently contacted the justice secretary. In her communication, Professor Jay stated she would "appreciate" her position "being clarified", adding that her earlier comments, as quoted by Ms Constance, had "nothing to do" with the situation in Scotland.
Political Reaction and Defence
Opposition leaders were scathing in their criticism following the vote. Russell Findlay, leader of the Scottish Conservatives, accused SNP and Green MSPs of putting "partisan politics before truth and integrity". He labelled it an "open-and-shut case of a ministerial code breach" for which Ms Constance should lose her job.
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said victims and survivors had "lost confidence" in the justice secretary, arguing she had twisted an expert's words "to find an excuse not to have an inquiry".
First Minister John Swinney led a robust defence of his minister. He described Ms Constance as a "sincere minister" who "would never address parliament in a way that would in any way mislead parliament or the public". Mr Swinney argued that during the September debate, she was making a "general point" drawing on Professor Jay's publicly stated views, not stating that the professor was commenting directly on the Scottish amendment.
"She's getting on with the job of making Scotland safer," the First Minister told parliament, urging MSPs to reject the motion.
The episode leaves the justice secretary politically wounded but still in post, with the First Minister's unwavering support ensuring her survival for now. The row has intensified calls for greater transparency and heightened scrutiny around the Scottish government's handling of the sensitive issue of child sexual exploitation.
