The SNP amendment is agreed as it is backed by 68 MSPs, with 56 against.

MSPs will now vote on the motion from the standards committee and the SNP amendment.

The SNP amendment is first up and as the parliament is not agreed we'll have a short suspension.

Martin Whitfield says the committee received correspondence from John Swinney after they had already agreed the process they would use and the make up of the committee.

"I know they have now been published for people to see," he adds.

Kate Forbes reiterates her point that the SNP amendment is about the principle of fair, impartial and proportionate justice when it comes to sanctions.

The deputy first minister tells the chambers all MSPs must have confidence in the parliament's procedures.

She says if agreement can be reached there is no reason why a form of recall of MSPs cannot be introduced.

Forbes adds it is time for an independent review of the complaints process.

Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP Willie Rennie says although Annie Wells "could" have followed Stephen Kerr's example, she was not "required" to do so.

Rennie says Matheson "failed" to ensure his iPad was not used for unparliamentary purposes.

He adds all members of the committee agreed on the financial penalty and that a suspension should take place.

The only disagreement was on the duration of the suspension.

He says: "It is therefore wrong to undermine the whole process, especially when there was so much unanimity through the whole process."

A game of political chesspublished at 15:33 British Summer Time 29 May

15:33 BST 29 May

Kirsten Campbell
BBC Scotland political correspondent

Political machinations can resemble a game of chess.

You have to think a few moves ahead.

But that can cause confusion if you haven't shared your game plan with your supporters.

The disarray in the SNP over the Matheson vote is a prime example.

At one stage the party's MSPs thought they would be expected to back the motion they were planning to amend, which would sanction Michael Matheson, but add a caveat, namely the process had been biased and needed to be reviewed.

But party strategists have decided they'll put in the caveat and leave others to impose the punishment.

I'm told by government insiders that a minority administration works differently.

You can't always assume you'll get your own way and that the wider party needs to get used to that again.

Gillian Mackay confirms the Scottish Greens will support the sanction recommended by the committee and adds Matheson should be held accountable for his actions.

The MSP says she wants to lay out concerns about the committee process.

And she adds there should be condemnation of the leak of the committee's recommendations.

Scottish Labour's Jackie Baillie says although it is "difficult" to sit in judgement of your colleagues, the committee's judgment reflects the seriousness of Matheson's actions.

She adds there was "no admission of error, no apology" only "denial, deflection and dishonesty".

Dame Jackie says: "This denial continued, misleading parliament, misleading the press and ultimately misleading the people of Scotland."

Ross accuses the first minister of attempting to derail and undermine due process.

This has been done for the sole purpose of looking after one of their own, he adds.

He says the actions of the first minister towards Annie Wells "would make Donald Trump blush".

"It is disgusting and disgraceful," Ross adds.

He goes on to accuse John Swinney of "bullyboy tactics".

Douglas Ross says the suggested suspension will seem lenient to the public, but does represent the most severe action ever taken against an MSP.

The Scottish Tory leader says: "Any other Scot would have been handed their P45 straight away.

"This was a deliberate and shameless attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of this parliament and the public."

Forbes says other members of the standards committee should have followed Kerr's example and excused themselves after making public comments on the case.

The deputy first minister says she wants the SPCB to initiate an independent review of the parliament's complaints policy to restore confidence and integrity in the procedures.

With four minutes to speak, Forbes declines further intervention and turns to Stephen Kerr's resignation from the committee.

As Forbes speaks, Stephen Kerr MSP is on his feet and speaking simultaneously.

Forbes quotes Kerr's statement on reasons he resigned from committee, citing his belief it would be "wrong" to sit on the committee, having made public pronouncements and that "for due process to be observed".

Forbes then gives way to Kerr who says this amendment is "nothing but an attack on the integrity of a member of this parliament".

Kerr says: "Does she of all people, having been through what she has been through in the past year that this is an attack on an honourable member and is motivated by vindictive purposes."

Forbes again reiterates her remarks have been based on the principle, not the personality and invites Kerr to "reflect precisely on that point".

Forbes says the government has "grave concerns" as to how the committee has determined the sanctions.

She says parliament has a responsibility to engage with these concerns now because to dismiss them will have "serious consequences" for MSPs in future.

Forbes adds: "It is the principle, not the personalities I will base my remarks on because while I believe Annie Wells should have resigned from the standards committee like Stephen Kerr, I do not want to see any abuse or harassment of MSPs - of Annie Wells or Michael Matheson."

Kate Forbes introduces an amendment to the motion.

The deputy first minister acknowledges a cross party group of MSPs found Michael Matheson to have breached the standards "expected of him".

Forbes says breaches like this should be "proportionately sanctioned" and adds Matheson has paid back the roaming costs.

She also tells MSPs no cost has been lost to the public purse.

Forbes says "actions have consequences" which led Matheson to lose his position in cabinet, despite being one of the longest serving ministers.

She also also highlights the reputational damage he suffered and the intrusion into his personal life.

Whitfield says the committee acknowledges the impact of the media coverage on Michael Matheson and his family.

He explains the committee was unanimous in the need for sanctions and a financial penalty.

However Alasdair Allan and Jackie Dunbar considered the financial element was at the higher range of available sanctions.

The committee was not unanimous on a suspension period for parliament but a majority agreed 27 days was appropriate.

Martin Whitfield says the committee sought to finish its consideration of the SPCB report as swiftly as possible.

It also allowed Michael Matheson to make representations to the committee.

This is the first time a SPCB report has been referred to the standards committee.

Whitfield tells MSPs: "I would note the disappointment of the whole committee that at the final stages of our consideration speculation appeared in the media before we had reached decisions and concluded our considerations."

In the name of Kate Forbes:

As an amendment to motion S6M-13368 in the name of Martin Whitfield (Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee's 1st Report, 2024 (Session 6)), insert at end ";

recognises that Stephen Kerr MSP resigned from the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in March 2024 as he had made public pronouncements on this case ahead of the complaint being heard by the committee;

agrees with Stephen Kerr MSP that to have remained as a committee member 'would have been wrong' as he 'couldn’t meet the test to be unbiased';

notes that Annie Wells MSP also made public pronouncements on this case in advance of the complaint being heard by the committee and has remained a committee member throughout

agrees that this runs the risk of the committee report being open to bias and prejudice and the complaint being prejudged, thereby bringing the parliament into disrepute

further agrees with the disappointment expressed by the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee that material relating to the committee's deliberations appeared in the media prior to its decisions being reached and announced, and calls on the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body to initiate an independent review of the Parliament’s complaints process to restore integrity and confidence in the Parliament and its procedures.

Martin Whitfield explains he is seeking the parliament's agreement to the sanction agreed by the standards committee.

Whitefiled reminds the chamber the standards committee recieved a report from the SPCB.

He adds the committee considered the report at five meetings in March and May.

Standards committee convener Martin Whitfield begins the debate.

Remember you can watch along with us here on this live page, just press the play icon at the top of the page.

It has been agreed that the vote on the SPPA motion on sanctions will be taken directly after the debate, so approximately 3.20pm.

In the name of Martin Whitfield:

That the parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee's 1st Report, 2024 (Session 6), Complaint against Michael Matheson MSP (SP Paper 597),

and agrees to impose the sanctions recommended in the report that the Parliament excludes Michael Matheson MSP from proceedings of the Parliament for a period of 27 sitting days and withdraws his salary for a period of 54 calendar days to take effect from the day after this motion is agreed.