Speaking at the Church and Nation Committee conference in Dunblane, Sir David highlighted examples of Parliamentary reporting which he says are not only misleading but in many cases untrue.

In his speech – on the subject of ‘Who speaks for Scotland?’ – Sir David said:

"In a democracy a free and independent critical press is essential. We should never take it for granted. I have visited too many countries where it does not exist. In Indonesia, for example, there is no press censorship. Editors told me it was just that their ‘licence to publish’ can be revoked by the government at any time.

"That is why though tempted at times by calls for Privacy Laws or statutory press codes, I believe these are best avoided by relying on self-regulation and a sense of responsibility in the press.

"The Scottish Parliament did not get a good press start and that may be partly our own fault, but let me just illustrate two areas where I think we have been less than fairly judged.

"When local government was reformed back in the 1970’s, and again in the 1990’s shadow councils were elected and existed for a whole year in duplicate alongside the existing councils, preparing for the change. The same ‘shadow year’ was originally contemplated for the Scottish Parliament – with all the attendant expense - yet we coped with the transition in less than two months. Given such speed in the public interest, the odd hiccups may have occurred, but credit should be given for the successful overall effort.

"Second on allowances, I frequently see the sums set aside for allowances added to MSPs salaries to give a wholly distorted income picture. Yet our rules on allowances are much stricter than those of Westminster and very much stricter than those of the European Parliament.

"No cash from these allowances goes via MSP’s pockets. Their staff are paid from the sums allocated direct by the Parliament. The same is true of office equipment or leases of premises. There is a strict audit and we have an effective Standards Committee.

"I have yet to see any mention of this tougher regime. Most people would expect their representatives to be supplied with the necessary secretaries, offices and computers just as they would expect these for their doctors, solicitors or bank managers. It is unfortunate that these essential items are expressed in terms of cash allowances, but they are really just limits on expenditure.

"A critical press will of course be vigilant on the activities of Parliament as a whole and of individual MSPs. That critical commentary has to include cartooning and lampooning. Satire and humour are essential parts of the weaponry of a free press.

"But one unfortunate recent trend is what I call "bitch journalism" – practised by both sexes, where character assassination of a reckless and cruel kind is employed. Several MSPs of all parties have fallen prey to this, mainly in the tabloid press and notably in the Daily Record.

"In the case of that paper the institution itself has come under sustained attack on a level which is mendacious in the extreme. I give two examples from last week’s paper.

"On Wednesday they published a telephone opinion poll which stated: ‘MSPs are currently entitled to 17 weeks holiday per year. Do you agree or disagree that this should be reduced to six weeks?’ I say emphatically that no MSP is entitled to 17 weeks holiday and I have yet to meet one who has had much over 2 weeks so far. If any MSP attempted to take anything approaching 17 weeks they would be quickly found out by their party and/or their constituents. It is simply a lie.

"I could run a poll saying ‘The Editor of the Daily Record is entitled to 2 million pounds salary. Do you agree or disagree that this should be reduced to lower the cost of your paper?’ My poll would have as little validity as his.

"Then on Thursday the front page led with a faked picture of the MSP commemorative medallion attached to a ribbon as though intended to be worn as a decoration with the headline ‘For services to nobody at all’. In fact these two-inch diameter plaques were ordered by the group organising the opening ceremony long before the Parliament was elected. It could have been a brooch or cuff links – it was simply a nice thought to give a memento to each Member elected to the first Scottish Parliament for 300 years.

"Of course the idea can be criticised by the press and MSPs themselves, but to fake it up as some kind of military decoration – the story continued on an inside page – and give it such ludicrous prominence shows a distorted sense of news value. It was also offensive to those who proudly wear awarded medals.

"In contrast that day’s debate on domestic violence which my deputy had to extend by half an hour to accommodate the 15 Members – all but two women – who spoke trenchantly and movingly on this important subject rated not one line in the next day’s Record.

"I am referring these two examples to the Press Complaints Commission in the hope that those who run the paper may be persuaded to return to the standards of decent journalism. I don’t know whether the Commission will entertain such a complaint on behalf of an institution, but it is there to maintain the ethics of journalism.

"The Minister of St. Giles in his memorable sermon at our kirking reminded us that politics was too serious to be left to the politicians: ‘But we should not forget that quiet pride in some unifying institution can tarnish into cynical indifference not because the institution lets the people down, but because our people can so easily decline from healthy critical engagement to negative destructive criticism, fault-finding for its own sake. The trust between a Parliament and its people needs exercising on both sides.’

"On the day of my election as Presiding Officer I quoted William McIlvanney’s poem about the Scottish lion becoming a kitten again which had to be cherished. I said we should all cherish the new Parliament. That does not mean molly-coddling it. Cherishing and caring includes robust criticism. There is a boundary between such criticism and persistent denigration involving bogus opinion polls and faked photographs."