Scottish Parliament, 15 December 2021

313 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

Health and Social Care

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon. I remind everyone that Covid measures are in place and that face masks should be worn when moving about the chamber or around the Holyrood campus.

The first item of business is portfolio question time—the first portfolio is health and social care. Members who wish to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak button or type an R in the chat function.

I advise members that there is quite a lot of demand for questions, so I ask for succinct questions and answers.

Clinical Research (Support)

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

1. To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the role that clinical research has played in leading the country out of the Covid-19 pandemic, how it will support clinical research in the national health service to improve the care and treatment of patients with non-communicable diseases such as heart disease and stroke. (S6O-00524)

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

Through the chief scientist office and NHS Research Scotland, the Scottish Government continues to invest in research infrastructure to support health boards to host and participate in a wide range of clinical research. That includes research relating to non-communicable diseases and, over the pandemic, studies to understand Covid-19 and trials of Covid-19 treatments and vaccines. Support for research in specific clinical areas is provided by clinical research networks and specialty groups, including for cardiovascular disease and stroke, as well as for other non-communicable diseases.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Funding for the chief scientist office has not increased since 2011 and, compared with the United Kingdom Government’s funding the National Institute for Health Research, it is less than two thirds of the funding for clinical research that is provided in England per capita. Without funding, Scotland risks losing talented clinical researchers and having reduced access to valuable new treatments. Will the Scottish Government commit to increasing its funding of the chief scientist office to ensure that the national health service in Scotland is not left behind?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

We can certainly review the funding, but I have to say that the research infrastructure in Scotland is absolutely excellent. The number of leading universities that we have, the joined-up NHS and the unique community health index number that follows patients through the joined-up process that they go through, make Scotland an excellent place in which to conduct research. We continue to attract a great deal of scientific research.

The level of investment of about £40 million a year includes £4 million a year for 26 clinical research networks and specialty groups that provide support for research in specific clinical areas. Of that money, £69,000 supports the cardiovascular disease research specialty group and £641,000 supports the stroke research network. A great deal of work is going on. There are real challenges to research in Scotland, given the course of the pandemic and the circumstances that we currently face, but actually the situation is pretty healthy.

General Practitioners and Surgery Provision (North-east Scotland)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of general practitioner numbers and surgery provision in the north-east. (S6O-00525)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The Scottish Government is fully committed to ensuring that all communities in Scotland receive safe, reliable and sustainable healthcare services. Of course, statutory responsibility for ensuring primary medical services rests locally with health boards and health and social care partnerships. It is for each board to put in place the services that best meet the needs of its patient population, through consultation and engagement with the local community.

The latest figures, which were published today, show that we now have a record 5,195 GPs working in Scotland, which is an increase of 74 on last year. We remain on track to deliver our commitment to increase the number of GPs working in Scotland by at least 800 by 2027.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Last week, Carden medical centre announced its imminent closure due to inability to recruit GPs, which will displace nearly 9,000 patients. A proposed merger was abandoned due to a continuing reduction in the number of permanent GPs across Aberdeen.

The Government’s failure to carry out workforce planning and to train and recruit GPs is a disgrace. Who will take responsibility for that, and what planning has been done to reverse the trend? When will the north-east have enough GPs to run the services that the people of Aberdeen need and deserve?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I say to the member that the Government has an impeccable record when it comes to staffing. We have the highest number—a record number—of staff in our NHS. That follows nine consecutive years of growth.

The decision on Carden medical centre was made by local partners in the Aberdeen City Health and Social Care Partnership. My understanding is that the HSCP is working for a smooth transition for all patients who are affected by the closure of the centre, that patients will automatically be registered to a new practice, and that there are nine practices within a 1 mile radius of the centre. I hope that disruption to the patients who are affected will therefore be minimised.

On the Government’s record on staffing our NHS, the health service was a central issue in the election only six months ago when, of course, my party was re-elected for a fourth term.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

We all know that GPs are under enormous strain and pressure as a result of the pandemic. However, in East Ayrshire, there have been cases of significant issues with practices communicating decisions to local residents, which has led to many people not even being able to book appointments or discuss treatment plans. What can the Scottish Government do to ensure that residents in East Ayrshire receive the best possible GP services and that they receive them in a timely manner?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Ms Mochan is right to refer to the fact that GPs are under incredible pressure, as are all NHS and social care staff, during the pandemic. I record my thanks to GPs for the hard work that they have done.

We provided GPs with additional funding prior to my winter announcement and as part of the winter package that I announced in Parliament a couple of months ago. I will take on board what Ms Mochan has said and see whether we can reach out to partners in East Ayrshire.

Omicron (Vaccine Procurement)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether the emergence of the omicron variant has influenced its discussions with the United Kingdom Government regarding the four-nations approach to vaccine procurement, particularly in relation to the Valneva vaccine and any potential need to deploy different vaccine formulations both domestically and internationally. (S6O-00526)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Information about the protection that vaccines offer in relation to omicron is still emerging. However, we know that boosters will maximise protection.

The Scottish Government will continue to be guided by the expert advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and our clinical advisers on the most effective approach to vaccine deployment in the face of the omicron variant, including advice on vaccine types. The UK vaccine task force procures vaccines on behalf of all four nations. We will continue to work within that framework.

As Fiona Hyslop might be aware, this week, with the Minister for Business, Tourism, Trade and Enterprise, I met Valneva to explore how the Scottish Government can continue to support the company’s work at Livingston. I put on record that support for Valneva’s investment at Livingston is of paramount importance to the Government.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Crucially, the vaccine that Valneva has developed can be transported and stored at room temperature. In contrast to other vaccines, which target the coronavirus’s spike protein, the Valneva vaccine, which is yet to be approved but has had positive stage 3 results, targets the whole coronavirus envelope.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that because variants are rapidly spreading globally and we need a strong global—not just national—vaccination programme, those factors might become premium? Will he raise those points in vaccine-order discussions with the UK Government?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes, I absolutely will raise those points with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and the other nations’ health ministers, whom I meet regularly. Fiona Hyslop is absolutely right to refer to the Valneva vaccine’s unique characteristics. She is also right to say that it is still pending approval by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. We look forward to seeing the results of that consideration.

As well as looking for vaccine for domestic uses, Scotland prides itself on being a good global citizen. I know that Fiona Hyslop understands that well. Therefore, we must consider what else we can do with vaccine supplies, particularly for the global south, where far too many of the population remain unvaccinated.

I repeat the point that I made in my opening answer to Ms Hyslop’s question. Not only do I, as the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, remain supportive, but the entire Government remains supportive of the site in Livingston and Valneva’s investment in it.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the Government for taking up our policy of mass vaccination centres. How many centres is the Government seeking to establish? How many sites have been identified? How many contracts or leases have been signed? By what date will all mass vaccination centres be open and administering jabs into people’s arms?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Cabinet secretary, that question is not directly relevant to the initial question, but if there is anything that you can usefully add, I invite you to do so.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. If Craig Hoy was made of chocolate, I am not sure that there would be a crumb of him left, because he would have eaten himself. Nonetheless—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That is not a response to the question, cabinet secretary. We move to question 4. I call Paul McLennan.

“Open with Care”

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what the latest “Open with Care” guidance is for care homes, in light of the emergence of the omicron variant. (S6O-00527)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Information about omicron is still emerging. However, it is vital that visiting continues to be supported so that people who are living in a care home—which is, first and foremost, their home—can maintain contact with loved ones, because that is important for mental health and wellbeing. That will be increasingly important as Christmas approaches so that people, their friends and families can spend time with one another.

In recognition of the importance of visiting, the First Minister, in her statement on 14 December on further protective measures for the general population, indicated that we will continue to support people to connect with their loved ones.

However, it is now recommended that visits be limited to two households per resident at a time, and that all protective measures including testing, hand washing, physical distancing and face masks be utilised to prevent transmission. The protective measures that are in place for care homes, which are greater than those that are in place in community settings, continue to be an important way to safeguard against the spread of Covid-19, including the new omicron variant. I fully expect care homes to support visits. We will keep everything under review as knowledge of omicron continues to emerge.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I have been in discussions with the care home relatives Scotland group, which has advised me that interpretation of the guidelines in care homes is wide ranging. Some care homes are bringing in tighter restrictions already. Are there interim measures that the Scottish Government can take, prior to further consideration of Anne’s law, to ensure that no one is denied a visit to a loved one this Christmas as long as it is done within the Scottish Government’s guidelines?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Let me make it clear that we expect care homes to continue to support visits, with all the necessary protective measures in place. However, as I said, as an extra precaution we now recommend that no more than two households meet a resident at any one time. That is in line with the guidance for the general population.

We are also asking everyone to test before they visit, and we will issue guidance to care homes asking them to do everything possible to accommodate visits. Care homes that have managed outbreaks should support named visitors to visit. It is vital that everyone works together to enable people to see each other in the lead-up to and over the Christmas period, so that everyone can spend time with others safely and with confidence. I reiterate that we expect care homes to continue to support visits.

Covid-19 Vaccine Roll-out (NHS Lanarkshire)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

5. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out in NHS Lanarkshire. (S6O-00528)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Our autumn/winter vaccination programme—our booster programme—is leading the way for the rest of the United Kingdom. We are leading the rest of the UK on first, second, third and booster doses, and we are accelerating the programme. We will continue to recruit more vaccinators and bring on board more clinics. For the attention of Craig Hoy, that includes more mass vaccination clinics, and some of those are coming on board later this week.

NHS Lanarkshire has made good progress throughout the autumn/winter campaign, with a peak output of almost 6,000 Covid boosters per day, which has resulted in 77 per cent of the over-50 population having had a booster. NHS Lanarkshire has delivered 43.8 per cent of booster or third doses to those over the age of 12. I will continue to report regularly to Parliament on the progress of the booster programme across Scotland.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank everyone in our national health service, and the volunteers, who are delivering the fastest vaccine roll-out in the UK, which is even more important given the new omicron threat.

Can the health secretary advise us what health boards can do to deliver booster vaccines at home as fast as possible for those who need them? As he will know from my correspondence with him, some of my constituents have not been able to make appointments as quickly as others who live locally.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes, I completely understand the point that Neil Gray is making. Naturally, as a cohort, housebound patients take longer to get to, so we cannot get through them as quickly as we would like to, but Neil Gray has done the right thing to correspond with me. In turn, I will correspond with the local health board to ensure that those individuals, who are often very vulnerable and not as mobile as the rest of the population, get their boosters as quickly as the rest of the population.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I associate myself with the comments about our fantastic vaccination staff, but I have spoken to constituents who had an appointment for their booster at the central mosque in Glasgow at 7.30 pm last night but, on arrival, were turned away and told that nobody would be vaccinated after 7.30, whether they had an appointment or not. Many people are scheduling appointments in the evening, because of childcare or work commitments so, given the speed that we require with regard to omicron, it is imperative that all appointments are fulfilled. Will the cabinet secretary look at that instance urgently and explain how capacity will be increased across board areas?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Of course, I will look at that. Glasgow has increased the number of vaccinators by about 200 in the space of a fortnight, so more and more appointments are coming online. Those issues are unfortunate, and I always regret instances of people being turned away. That should not be happening, so I will look at the case that Paul O’Kane mentioned. In his question, he recognised that Scotland’s vaccination programme is a huge success, but we need to ramp it up and accelerate it over the coming weeks. I will look at the case that he referenced and feed back to him directly.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Stephanie Callaghan, who joins us remotely, has a brief supplementary question.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

NHS Lanarkshire recently urged the public to familiarise themselves again with the wide range of local NHS services, because 10 per cent of those who attend accident and emergency are sent home with self-care advice or referred to other services. What further steps can the Scottish Government take to encourage people to access other services and minimise the pressures on A and E?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please answer as briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I think that this is question 6—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

It is a supplementary question to the earlier question from Neil Gray.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Forgive me, Presiding Officer. I thought that it was the next question—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You might need to write to Stephanie Callaghan.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes, I will write to Stephanie Callaghan.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That would be helpful.

Free Dental Care

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what measures it is taking, including any that may be funded through its budget, that will help deliver free dental care during the current parliamentary session. (S6O-00529)

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

As a first step to delivering our manifesto commitment to remove dental charges in this parliamentary session, we abolished charges for all young people under the age of 26 from August 2021. We are also determined to support the profession and ensure that dentists remain in practice, following disruptions to services during the Covid-19 pandemic. Our budget for 2022-23 delivers an unprecedented 9 per cent increase for general dental services, which will support the continued recovery of national health service dental services while we begin on the delivery of significant reforms, with the manifesto commitment as the centrepiece.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I think the cabinet secretary for that response. Having been contacted by my constituents in Glasgow Kelvin about their concerns over limitations on accessing emergency dental provision, I would like to know what discussion and actions the Scottish Government is undertaking to safeguard access to emergency dental provision in the face of challenges from omicron and other variants.

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I thank the member for that wee promotion to cabinet secretary, although I am not sure that I would be thankful for that right now.

We have written to members of the profession to update them with regard to providing access to care over the winter period. Urgent patients will continue to be seen by their local dentist, when it is safe for that to happen using the personal protective equipment that continues to be provided by the Scottish Government at no cost to the sector. We have also instructed health boards to ensure that they have sufficient capacity to see emergency cases if local practices are unable to do so. Those measures will support patient access to critical care in the coming months.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

A dentist with 30 years of experience contacted me to explain how NHS dentistry is not paying the bills, despite current levels of Covid funding. He sees 25 patients a day and is booked out until March next year, but he has had to take on two additional part-time jobs to make ends meet. His is not an isolated case—for many dental practitioners, NHS dentistry is not viable, with a 30 per cent cut in taxable income for principals and associates since 2008-09.

The British Dental Association estimates that it will require at least—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question, please, Mr Gulhane.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

T

he British Dental Association estimates

that it will require at least a 30 per cent increase in dental tariffs as an interim measure. Is the minister willing to increase the tariffs by 30 per cent to sustain services at this critical time?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I assure the member that, this year, the dental profession is receiving an unprecedented level

of increase. It is an extremely difficult situation for dentists while their capacity is constrained by infection protection control measures, but we have supported them throughout the pandemic, and we continue to support them in order to recover NHS dental services. It is essential that we focus on recovery before reform, but we are eager and keen to look at reforms and have further discussions with the dental profession in the future.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Dentists tell me that there is a two-year treatment backlog, so I am glad that the minister is willing to consider reform. Many dentists are seeing patients privately, such is the demand. What is the Scottish Government doing to prevent privatisation by the back door, and will the minister agree to meet me and representatives of the Scottish Dental Association to respond to its proposal for a review of the value and reimbursement structure for the whole dentistry team?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I can confirm that, in recent months, we have seen a substantial increase in the level of activity—the number of patients who are seen in NHS dental settings. Therefore, the situation is improving, although the recent turn of events with the pandemic will undoubtedly cause further challenge. However,

I very much welcome that improvement.

Dental activity is being closely monitored on a month-to-month basis, and, as I have set out many times in the chamber, we have given a great deal of financial support to the sector. I am always happy to meet Jackie Baillie in order to navigate our way through this challenging time, and consider how we respond to the needs of the sector and our ambitions for NHS dental care in Scotland.

Health and Social Care

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what assurances it can offer to people that health and social care services are being supported during the on-going pandemic. (S6O-00530)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

In August, the First Minister launched the national health service recovery plan in response to pressures on NHS services caused by the pandemic over the past 18 months. The plan sets out key headline ambitions and actions to be developed and delivered now and over the next five years. That is backed by more than £1 billion of investment over the next five years, of which £80 million has already been invested this year alone to support NHS boards to target the backlog of treatment and care. Although it is important to stress that recovery is the immediate task, the plan is fundamentally about ensuring that the recovery process delivers long-term sustainability and alternative pathways of care that allow people to be treated more quickly and closer to home.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Social care services in Stirling and across Scotland are working hard to deliver quality care for some of our most vulnerable citizens. However, it is clear that the continuing effects of the pandemic and Brexit are weighing heavily on staffing. That has resulted in many key stakeholders expressing interest in the Scottish Government’s proposals for a national care service. Will the minister share what next steps will be taken to progress that important work?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I agree with Evelyn Tweed that the pandemic and Brexit are having a major effect on staffing in many parts of the country. In some parts, the extent of staff loss due to Brexit is great—one service told me that it has lost 40 per cent of its staff due to Brexit.

On the question of next steps, I thank everyone who took part in the national care service consultation. Around 3,000 people took part in more than 100 engagement meetings, and we received around 1,300 written responses. The responses are now being analysed, and we will publish that analysis in the new year. We will then carefully consider all the views that were expressed through the consultation to develop and prepare a programme road map to share with Parliament, stakeholders and citizens. We are also—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, please, minister.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

We are fully committed to the co-design of the future national care service, putting people with lived and living experience at the heart of that design.

Rural Healthcare Services

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to ensure that healthcare services in rural areas are working for the people that they serve. (S6O-00531)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

We aim to ensure that we have equitable, high-quality health services available to everyone in Scotland, including those who live in remote and rural areas. We continue to evolve health and care services through developing new treatments and technologies to meet demand and to deliver the best patient outcomes. That includes our commitment to create a centre of excellence for rural and remote medicine and social care. Our health and social care partnerships across Scotland play a key role in supporting national health service boards to work with communities and stakeholders on designing services according to the needs of local populations.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the cabinet secretary for his detailed answer. Is the Scottish Government encouraging and supporting the Scottish Ambulance Service’s patient transport service to make use of alternative types of vehicle, such as SUVs, for patients with mobility needs in rural areas in order to free up ambulances for those who need them?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes—that was part of a package of measures for the Scottish Ambulance Service that I announced earlier this year. The member will know that the patient transport service has two components: the blue-light vehicle fleet and the patient transport fleet. When patients qualify for transportation to a healthcare setting, they are allocated a seat on a patient transport vehicle that is designed for use by people with mobility needs.

The service’s patient needs assessment determines their requirement for support. If the patient requires mobility and clinical support, that is managed by the Ambulance Service. However, if it is deemed that only transport is needed, the service will signpost the patient to one of its agreed alternative transport providers or, indeed, Traveline Scotland. For those on low incomes, health boards can also provide financial reimbursement for taxi journeys to appointments.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Very briefly—Foysol Choudhury.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

Cabinet secretary, a large number of my constituents have contacted me to say that they have still not received their Covid-19 booster shot, despite being over 75 years of age. There is also a clear lack of availability of appointments in my region, with many people also unable to book online for their flu shot.

Many of my constituents in the Lothians want to celebrate Christmas with their families safely. What extra provision is the Scottish Government making to ensure that everyone who is entitled to a shot gets a shot, especially those people in rural areas?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Our booster and flu vaccination programmes are going extremely well. Where there are anomalies, particularly involving older people, who we know are at higher risk of severe illness from Covid and at higher risk from flu, or instances in which people are unable to get an appointment, as Mr Choudhury has referenced, I am happy for him to write to me with the details and I will raise that the local health board.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you very much. I apologise to Karen Adam, whom I was unable to call, but we need to move on.

Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I again remind colleagues who wish to ask a supplementary to any of the questions to press their request-to-speak button or place an R in the chat function during the relevant question.

Food Banks

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the latest Trussell Trust food bank statistics in relation to Scotland. (S6O-00532)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The statistics show that Scotland is the only area of the United Kingdom to see a marked reduction in the number of emergency food parcels, with a 25 per cent reduction between April and September compared with 2019. However, no one should have to rely on charitable food provision, and we are currently consulting on a national plan to end the need for food banks as a primary response.

The Government’s human rights approach means that we promote a cash-first response to hardship and, as we have seen in our budget, we are focused on boosting the incomes of low-income households, which is key to decreasing the need for food banks.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

Scotland is the only area in the UK that has seen a marked decrease in the number of emergency food parcels in the past six months, as the cabinet secretary has just noted. That has been credited to the Scottish child payment, which was introduced by the Scottish Government.

In a damning report that was released on Monday, the New Economics Foundation says that the poorest half of families are worse off since Boris Johnson came to power, while the richest have seen their income boom. Does the cabinet secretary think that that shows a tale of two Governments and that, while the Scottish Government doubles the Scottish child payment, the UK Government cuts universal credit by £20—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call the cabinet secretary.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

—from those who really need it the most?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I think that Siobhian Brown makes an important point. UK Government welfare cuts are driving hardship and pushing people to food banks. Its punitive approach takes money out of the pockets of those who can least afford it. That includes the deeply concerning cut to universal credit, which represented the biggest single cut to welfare in 70 years.

The Scottish Government’s doubling of the Scottish child payment to £20 from April 2022 is among the ways in which we have shown leadership that the UK Government simply has not shown. It is time that it matched our ambition in tackling child poverty.

Social and Affordable Housing (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Jim Fairlie (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

2. I thank the Presiding Officer for his patience with my late arrival to the meeting.

To ask the Scottish Government what further support it will make available to help Perth and Kinross Council improve the availability of social and affordable housing in the Perthshire South and Kinross-shire constituency. (S6O-00533)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Since 2007, we have delivered more than 105,000 affordable homes, including 2,343 in Perth and Kinross. As part of our commitment to deliver a further 110,000 affordable homes by 2032, last week’s budget confirmed an increase in the affordable housing programme of a further £174 million in 2022-23. Over the past five years, Perth and Kinross has received more than £77 million in grant support from the affordable housing supply programme, which has helped the delivery of 963 affordable homes. During this parliamentary session, Perth and Kinross will benefit from investment of more than £86 million, which will go towards the delivery of more good-quality, affordable homes.

Jim Fairlie (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

As the cabinet secretary has just stated, a number of significant developments and refurbishments in my constituency, including at Huntingtower and Newhouse Road, have taken place through the efforts of various partnerships and projects, local housing associations and, of course, the Scottish Government.

However, does the cabinet secretary agree that the biggest boost to council house building that the country has seen this millennium was the reversal of the Tory policy from the 1980s that started the selling off of the best council housing stock, with no provision at all for rebuilding houses or cancelling the housing debt?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Yes, I would agree with that. Scotland has led the way in the delivery of affordable housing across the United Kingdom. In 2009, we reintroduced grant funding for council house building, which has supported the delivery of more than 16,000 council homes across Scotland. By ending the right to buy, we have also protected existing social rented homes and prevented the sale of up to 15,500 houses over a 10-year period.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Miles Briggs has a supplementary question.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The allocation of funding for affordable housing projects has not been equal. For example, Edinburgh received 7.3 per cent of the total budget, although it has 8.8 per cent of the whole population—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am afraid, Mr Briggs, that the question is about the Perthshire South and Kinross-shire constituency. Unless your question is relevant to that, I think that you will struggle to—

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

It is relevant, with regard to the affordable housing budget.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Complete the question, but I think that it strays a little far for a supplementary.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Given that differentiation in the allocations, does the cabinet secretary believe that the cut in the housing budget will have an impact as well?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

There is no cut in the housing budget—the housing budget is going up. Edinburgh will be receiving more money through the affordable housing supply programme than it has in previous years. That surely should be welcomed by everybody across the chamber.

Social Housing

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to allowing registered social landlords to purchase properties from home owners who would like to remain in their homes but become social housing tenants. (S6O-00534)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I am actively considering the implications of enabling support to be provided through the affordable housing supply programme to facilitate such purchases, where social landlords wish to make them. There are a number of considerations to be taken into account to ensure that any funding that is offered does not impact on other support that might be available for owners.

I would encourage home owners who are having financial difficulty to seek advice as soon as possible, as there is support available that they may be able to access, including our home owners support fund.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that I have written to her about the Inverclyde acquisition programme. Registered social landlords in my constituency have asked for the existing policy to be amended, as it allows them only to purchase properties on the open market. They would like an option for properties to be transferred from private ownership to social housing, with the owner-occupier moving to become a tenant. That would relieve the tenant of the maintenance burden, but would allow them to continue to live in their home. That could help RSLs to bring properties with maintenance challenges up to standard, and would be beneficial for RSLs and prospective new tenants. Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether she has engaged with RSLs in Inverclyde on the issue? Will she provide details of any plans to change the policy?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

We have agreed with the council and RSLs in Inverclyde an acquisition programme that will make around £1.35 million available in the current financial year to enable the purchase of up to 50 properties on the open market. I am aware of the situation that the member highlights. As I have just mentioned, the implications of the suggested change for other policy areas are being examined, including those involving the provision of support to home owners. Of course, local authorities can assist homeowners who need to carry out repairs through the scheme of assistance. I am happy to keep the member informed about that.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Miles Briggs. Second time relevant, Mr Briggs.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Ministers have previously said that they would look to develop plans with local authorities to help to purchase empty homes. How many such purchases have actually been completed?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The empty homes option is a good one. A number of empty homes have been purchased and brought back into use following repairs. I do not have the figure to hand, but I am happy to write to Miles Briggs to make him aware of it. We can do more on empty homes. Of course, we fund empty homes officers so that local authorities can look at the opportunities in their areas to bring more empty homes back into circulation. I am happy to provide the figure to Miles Briggs in due course.

Local Government Services (Argyll and Bute)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

4. To ask the Scottish Government how it works with Argyll and Bute Council to support the delivery of local government services across the area’s islands and remote peninsulas. (S6O-00535)

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister, Ben Macpherson, joins us remotely.

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

Ministers and officials regularly meet representatives of all Scottish local authorities, including Argyll and Bute Council. Our island local authority partners are key stakeholders in how we develop and deliver islands policy. We regularly engage through the islands strategic group and national islands plan delivery group to identify and collaborate on issues facing our island communities.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Employment is integral to supporting the delivery of local government services across Argyll and Bute. Will the minister therefore provide an update on the work of the Campbeltown economic summit, which was convened following the closure of the wind tower factory and the town’s creamery?

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

Following the most recent Campbeltown economic summit, work has continued with partners on the Kintyre action plan, led by Highlands and Islands Enterprise. The aim of the summit was to identify and support new business and employment opportunities, including in the space, hydrogen and whisky sectors. Future options for the CS Wind facility are being considered with the administrators of CS Wind UK. Pending the outcome of the administration process, further stakeholder meetings will be scheduled in early 2022.

We continue to support and diversify the region’s economy. We have committed to investing up to £25 million in the Argyll and Bute growth deal to deliver a range of strategic projects that will create jobs and maximise the region’s future economic potential, with a focus on aquaculture and tourism. We hope to sign the full deal for Argyll and Bute next year.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 5 was not lodged.

Tenant Support (West of Scotland)

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government how many tenants in the west of Scotland have used the tenant grant fund and tenant hardship loan fund. (S6O-00537)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

A specific regional breakdown for the west of Scotland is not information that we hold. However, as of mid-November, 233 tenant hardship loans had been awarded totalling £615,614, and a further 12 loans had been offered with a potential award value of £38,608.

Councils are administering the tenant grant fund, and they will report progress to the Scottish Government quarterly. The first report is due by the end of this month. It will set out the number and level of grants that were issued, whether those paid the arrears in full or partially, and how many tenancies were sustained at the time.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

In the light of the Government’s refusal to continue the ban on evictions and of the ramifications of that, which we are now seeing—as was predicted by many Labour members and many people in the housing sector—and given the removal of any financial support for people who are in trouble with arrears, and indeed the effects of the pandemic, which are clearly very far from over, what is the Government’s plan to support people who are in arrears to stay in warm, safe and affordable homes?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The member will be aware of the range of work that we are undertaking, including through the coronavirus legislation, to extend some of the measures that were brought in during the pandemic. There is also the work on the rented sector strategy, on which I will be saying more next week, which includes the commitment to act on winter evictions. I hope that the member is supportive of that agenda.

He will be well aware that grant and loan funds are not the only action being taken on funding. I could also mention the wider £38 million package of support that was brought in during the pandemic, the discretionary housing payments, which are worth £82 million this year, and a great deal else besides. I hope that the member will engage constructively with that agenda.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Will the minister outline how the new Scottish budget will help to prevent homelessness?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Yes, indeed. There is a great deal in the Scottish budget to take forward such work, including the £23.5 million homelessness support fund to local authorities and the £10 million that is available from the ending homelessness together fund, which will build on the significant progress that was made in the past year as part of an overall £100 million investment in the course of this parliamentary session. There is also substantial investment in the provision of new affordable homes; there is the work that I mentioned before that is being funded to develop and then implement the rented sector strategy; and £80 million is available for discretionary housing payments.

Fuel Poverty (Rural and Remote Areas)

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how its housing strategy is supporting action to prevent fuel poverty in households in rural and remote areas. (S6O-00538)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Our ambition is for everyone to have access to a safe, warm and affordable home. We provide support to fuel-poor households through our heat in buildings programme, and we are determined to address the higher levels of extreme fuel poverty that are found in many of Scotland’s remote and rural areas. By the end of 2021, we will have allocated more than £1 billion since 2009 to tackle fuel poverty and improve energy efficiency. Since 2013, more than 150,000 homes throughout Scotland have benefited from our home energy efficiency programmes. We will continue to fund home energy Scotland to provide free and impartial advice on how to make homes warmer and cheaper to heat, and we will publish our fuel poverty strategy later this month.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Some 43 per cent of homes in the Western Isles are estimated to be in fuel poverty, which is almost double the national average. It is a crisis that has been exacerbated following the recent loss of two meter readers, meaning that more household bills are worked out by higher price estimates. Given that the Government has set a target to reduce the number of homes that are in fuel poverty nationally to 5 per cent by 2040, how, specifically, will it support island communities such as the Western Isles to meet that target?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I recognise some of the challenges that Donald Cameron has mentioned. We are incorporating adjustments to the UK minimum income standard element of the fuel poverty definition to take account of the generally higher cost of living in Scotland’s remote, rural and island communities. Through our energy efficiency schemes, we are already spending more per head on energy efficiency in remote and rural areas, where we know installation and labour costs are higher, and our warmer homes Scotland scheme has introduced additional renewable and enabling measures, including ground-source heat pumps and micro-wind and micro-hydro systems, which will be of particular benefit to households that live off the gas grid. We recognise those challenges, and they will be covered in the forthcoming fuel poverty strategy.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

Given that the Scottish Government has committed to a remote, rural and islands action plan, backed by a £50 million fund, in what ways is the Government drawing on lessons from previous programmes—specifically, on what worked and did not work? In what ways can housing enablers and community trusts with lived experience feed into the development of the remote, rural and islands action plan?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, please, cabinet secretary.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

In a

ll of those things, the role of community trusts is important, and so is the role of local authorities, of course.

Councils that serve rural and remote island communities can now provide to those in extreme fuel poverty grant in aid worth up to £14,000, which is up from the previous maximum of £9,000. Those councils can also apply for higher maxima of £8,000 of grant in aid for zero or low-carbon heating measures.

I will write to the member with more details in response to her question.

Convention of Scottish Local Authorities

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities—COSLA. (S6O-00539)

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

The Scottish Government engages regularly with COSLA representatives to discuss a wide range of issues as part of our shared commitment to work in partnership with local government to improve outcomes for the people of Scotland.

I last met COSLA on 18 November to discuss social security with Councillor Kelly Parry, and I am meeting the COSLA presidential team on 16 December, which is tomorrow.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

COSLA has noted that the Scottish National Party will cut its allocation to Scottish councils by £280 million in real terms next year. As the Government’s assault on local government finances intensifies, what would the minister advise town halls to do next April: slash services or hike the council tax?

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

I note Mr Hoy’s service as a councillor, and I wonder

whether he might want to point that out.

It would be helpful for the Parliament to note that table 5.16 in the Scottish budget document includes additional funding of more than £1.3 billion—currently held in other Scottish Government portfolios—which will be added to the local government settlement in year.

Taken together with the funding that is included in table 5.13 in the budget document, the total funding package for 2022-23 is more than £12.5 billion, providing an additional £917.9 million, which is a real-terms increase of 5.1 per cent.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Following last week’s budget statement, Douglas Lumsden said that local government should be “properly funded”. Concern from the Tories is touching, given that they have financially eviscerated council budgets in England over the past decade. Have they said at any time how much the proper funding of local government should be and where resources should come from to meet their demands, or are we expected to guess?

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

Mr Gibson makes an important point. The Conservatives are keen to criticise the Scottish Government’s budget decisions, but they rarely come up with any solutions, whether on changing spending priorities or taxation changes, or by pressing their colleagues in Westminster for action at United Kingdom level, with the vast amount of tax powers that the UK Government has that the Scottish Government does not.

It is important to point out, in comparison, that local authorities in Scotland have largely been protected from the savage budget cuts that counterparts in England and Wales have seen, although local government funding is not wholly comparable. As I said, there will be a real-terms increase to local authority budgets for the coming year of 5.1 per cent.

I refer to my supplementary answer to Mr Hoy.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I have said previously and will say again that it is pretty futile to heckle a person who is appearing on a screen.

That concludes portfolio questions.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. In my enthusiasm to ask the minister a question, I omitted to refer to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which draws attention to my position as a councillor in East Lothian.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That is now on the record, Mr Hoy.

Dalzell Historical Industrial Transaction

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Ivan McKee, who will give an update on the Dalzell historical industrial transaction. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

In 2016, faced with the potential permanent closure of the last remaining steel plant in Scotland and the loss of hundreds of highly skilled jobs, the Scottish Government took action to support the purchase of the rolling mills at Dalzell and Clydebridge.

Many members will remember that Longs Steel had owned the businesses and that Tata Steel UK had taken them over from Longs. Following difficulties because of energy prices and feasible margins, Tata Steel UK mothballed the plants in 2015 and it was looking for an alternative operator for the business.

To facilitate the sale and ensure the continued operation of such an important industrial asset for Scotland, the Scottish Government took ownership of the business for a short period of time while it transferred from Tata Steel UK to Liberty House Group, which is part of GFG Alliance and which continues to operate the rolling mill to this day.

The

transaction that took place back in 2016 was a unique and unprecedented economic intervention by the Scottish Government. The agreement to facilitate the transaction was concluded over a period of days in March 2016 while Parliament was in the pre-election recess. In my statement today, I will provide a point of clarification about one aspect of the agreement between the Scottish Government and Tata Steel UK. Before I do so, however, I will provide some further background to the transaction.

Earlier, the employees of the rolling mills in the Lanarkshire steel communities had left their work to start the Christmas holidays in the knowledge that they had been made redundant going into January 2016 and that the prospect of a future for the steel industry in Scotland was looking very bleak. Only a handful of people remained in the plant for health and safety reasons.

There had been excellent collaborative work from members across the Parliament, trade unions and local authorities to support the steel task force. Despite the apparent lack of investors in the Scottish steel plants, the steel task force committed to leaving no stone unturned to find a positive outcome and avoid the potential demise of the Lanarkshire mills.

Currently, around 140 people are employed at Dalzell and Clydebridge.

The Scottish Government’s intervention resulted in the continuation of steel production and skilled employment at Liberty Steel Dalzell. A detailed and complex negotiation led to the transfer of the ownership of the plants to a business that has since supported the workforce and ensured the continued manufacturing of high-quality steel slab products from the Lanarkshire rolling mill.

The matter that I bring to Parliament today concerns one particular point in the contract. I wish to explain the issue and the work that the Scottish Government is doing to clarify it with the businesses that are involved, and importantly to assure the people of Scotland and the Parliament that the decision to facilitate the continued manufacturing of steel in Scotland was the correct one.

The steel industry across the United Kingdom and globally has faced many challenges in recent years. As was set out in Parliament on 24 March 2021, the collapse of the Greensill Capital finance house, which was a major financier of the GFG Alliance, highlighted a risk to the steel industry in Scotland.

During 2021, ministers have advised the Parliament of our continued work to retain and support the economic opportunities that the Lanarkshire steel mills provide. I have met local elected members to keep them informed of the work that is being done to protect the steel industry in Scotland. Officials have been working to better understand the Scottish Government’s position in respect of the GFG Alliance, as would be expected given the jobs that are at stake and the support that has been provided to it. It was during a detailed review of the previous transaction to inform the contingency work that officials discovered a detail that would need to be considered by the companies that are involved.

It is important to note that, although there is on-going monitoring of the situation across the current business in Scotland, we are aware that the United Kingdom Government has also been active as part of the wider GFG Alliance activity at the larger plants in other parts of the UK. There has not been a request for support from the GFG Alliance. The business in Scotland continues to operate and produce under challenging circumstances, which is a credit to the Scottish workforce.

On 24 March 2016, Tata Steel UK and Liberty House agreed that the Scottish Government would act as an intermediary between the companies and facilitate a sale of the plants by Tata Steel UK to the Scottish Government, which would immediately sell the sites to Liberty House.

We are advised that there is one specific part of the contract arrangement that has arisen during our contingency work that may not comply with state aid rules. The clause in question granted an enduring indemnity from the Scottish ministers to Longs Steel, whereby the Scottish ministers would be liable to cover the cost of certain liabilities arising from Tata Steel’s ownership of the Lanarkshire plants.

It is important to ensure that the Parliament is aware that there has been no call on that indemnity to date, and that the circumstances in which it would be called upon are, in our view, unlikely to materialise. At the time of the deal, a parent company guarantee was signed with Liberty House, which meant that, if the part of the company at Liberty Steel Dalzell ceased to exist, the liabilities would pass to the wider group. However, I reiterate that our contingency planning and recent reports on the wider group have highlighted that the Lanarkshire plant is operating well, considering the current conditions that it has faced.

If the wider group fails to exist and the site is to be repurposed for a different use, some of those liabilities—liabilities for environmental remediation—may then crystallise to the current operator and any previous operators of the site. Many varying factors would need to arise before such a scenario would come to fruition, but it was imperative that, having identified that the clause in question was no longer valid, I made the relevant business and the Parliament aware of the situation.

In addition, the Parliament will want to note that no money has been paid or will be paid under the contract by the Scottish Government beyond the £1 that was paid to purchase the business, which was immediately recouped upon its sale.

In 2016, the contractual negotiation proceeded at pace in a highly pressured commercial environment, with our aim being to save a totemic Scottish industry—an aim in which we were successful. It was not our intention to sign up to a contract clause that might not comply with state aid requirements. The conclusion that was reached on state aid, based on advice at the time, was different from what I have outlined today, and we decided that we were able to proceed with the transaction.

As members around the chamber would expect, we have informed Tata Steel, and we have ensured that it has been provided with notice of this statement, to allow it to consider any commercial implications for the business. We also needed to ensure that Tata Steel, as a global business, had time to notify its head office in Mumbai. It is understandable that it will need time to reflect on and consider its position. We will continue to have supportive dialogue with Tata, and the company has access to our officials as it requires.

We have also formally informed Audit Scotland, and we will take steps to communicate with Liberty Steel UK and the European Commission through the relevant United Kingdom Government department.

In summary, the detailed analysis of commercial interventions that is now taking place demonstrates that the Scottish Government will always do its very best to ensure that any agreements that we enter into are the right ones. My officials will work with stakeholders to go into further detail and analyse any lessons that should be learned.

I opened my statement by acknowledging the collective efforts that were made across the Parliament back in March 2016 to ensure that steel communities in Scotland had a future. Today, high-quality steel products continue to be produced in Lanarkshire. Skilled manufacturing employment continues, which would not have been the case without our intervention. It was our assessment at the time that our intervention was the best way to ensure the reopening of the plants, to secure a key Scottish industrial asset for the future and to ensure that Scotland’s steel industry did not fall silent.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister will now take questions on the issues that were raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for that, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would be grateful if members who want to ask a question could press their request-to-speak buttons or, if they are joining us remotely, place an R in the chat function.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement.

In this parliamentary session and in the previous one, I have questioned ministers about transparency regarding the Scottish Government’s exposure in the form of guarantees and support to the GFG Alliance. We have seen the extended attempts by the

Financial Times

newspaper to access figures, which it should have been relatively straightforward for the Government to provide, on the taxpayer’s exposure relating to the Lochaber operations, which we discovered amounted to a sum of some £586 million.

From today’s statement, the Scottish Government appears to have been unaware of its commercial exposure to the operations in Lanarkshire. It has been advised that its arrangements, which were rushed through ahead of the elections in May 2016, with the Parliament unable to scrutinise the deal but ministers able to make political capital out of it, may be unlawful.

When was the Scottish Government first advised that its agreement might not comply with state aid rules? How much of the potential liabilities is the Scottish Government exposed to in the deal, and how long will those exposures remain?

For the chamber to have any confidence in the transparency or even clarity of the Scottish Government’s agreements, will the minister agree to full transparency in relation to the Scottish Government’s relationship with GFG Alliance and commit to making available to MSPs any information relating to those agreements?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

The first point to make is that there are no exposures to the Scottish Government as a consequence of what I have outlined today. The second point is that we are, of course, committed to full transparency within the limits of legal advice and commercial sensitivity and will continue to be so. The third point to make is that the statement that I made today has no bearing on Lochaber, which was a completely separate transaction.

I also make the point that the number that Jamie Halcro Johnston quoted with regard to Scottish Government exposure is more than covered by the assets that the Scottish Government has security for in relation to Lochaber. He will be well aware of that, because that information has been made available. There is therefore no exposure to the Scottish Government with regard to that transaction either.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Answer my questions.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

The final point that I will make is that, although the Scottish Government moved the transaction through at pace in March 2016, it was not—as the member perhaps implied—as a consequence of the election timetable. Rather, it was absolutely as a consequence of our needing to move fast to secure that commercial deal to save those jobs. It was about the commercial reality that we faced at that time. Frankly, we are proud that we did that in order to save those jobs and the Scottish steel sector. It was the right decision at that time and it continues to be so. There is still a steel sector in Scotland and people are still employed in highly skilled jobs in that sector in Scotland. As I made clear, there is no exposure to the Scottish Government as a consequence of my statement today or the actions that we took at that time.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I encourage members to ask their question and then to listen to the response.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I note that, Presiding Officer.

I remind the chamber of my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am a member of Community, which is the trade union that represents steel workers. I, too, thank the minister for advance sight of his statement.

Despite the Government’s acknowledgement that it broke the law, is it the case that there is no implication for the security of the 140 jobs on that site? That is perhaps the most important question.

From one former business person to another, can we perhaps put this into plainer terms? What are we talking about? Is the Government saying that, if GFG and Liberty House were to collapse, it would have to pay the clean-up costs? If so, what would that bill be? The clean-up cost for Ravenscraig was £70 million, 20 years ago. Given that it has written this indemnity, for which there is theoretical liability, is there any obligation whatsoever for Tata to rescind that? Although the Scottish Government may have broken the law, there is no obligation on Tata to let it off the hook, is there?

Finally, I will ask about process. When did this come to light? I do not believe that the minister answered that important question from Jamie Halcro Johnston. How is it possible that such an important deal could have got through Government due diligence without the fact that it breaks the law being spotted?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

I am sorry about the timing point—Jamie Halcro Johnston asked a number of questions.

We have been looking at the matter through the course of the past month, as a consequence of GFG’s evolving situation, in order to understand what we may need to do in relation to being involved to save those jobs, should a difficult situation transpire.

As I said in my statement, it is all credit to the workforce at the site that the plant continues to operate successfully in the face of significant challenges. A very complex situation has had to be worked through and advice has had to be taken as to the situation with regard to where we are just now. That process has been worked through and, as we have achieved clarity on the situation and taken the relevant advice, we bring forward this statement to provide transparency to the Parliament and others as to the current situation.

In relation to liability, the whole point of the statement is to say that, as a consequence of the current position, there is no liability to the Scottish Government. I made that very clear in my statement.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Clare Adamson joins us remotely.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

As a member of the steel task force, which was, of course, a cross-party endeavour, I am aware how vital it was to save the jobs at the steel mills at

Dalzell and Clydebridge. Steel making is synonymous with my constituency of Motherwell and Wishaw. What impact, if any, will the substance of the statement have on the on-going Liberty Steel operations at Dalzell and Clydebridge and the 140 jobs that are still protected by the deal that the Scottish Government made?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

As the member is aware, 140 people are employed at the site, and those jobs would not exist if the Scottish Government had not intervened and protected the sector, and there are many jobs in the supply chain and the wider community that are supported as a direct and indirect consequence of that. The statement today makes absolutely no impact on those jobs; they will continue as long as the plant continues to operate.

As I said, officials and I work closely and regularly with the business, local members, trade unions and others to understand the latest position. The business continues to operate successfully and the Scottish Government has been very engaged to understand what we need to do to ensure that that continues to be the case, because we are committed to the sector in Scotland.

For clarity, today’s statement will have no impact on that situation.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

In the statement, the minister said that Scottish Government officials

“will work with stakeholders to ... analyse any lessons that should be learned.”

Given the lack of transparency around the agreement, can the minister confirm which stakeholders will be involved in the process and whether the findings will be shared fully and expeditiously with the Parliament and the wider public?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

That we have made the statement today talks to the fact that we are and continue to be committed to transparency on the situation. We will look at the internal processes regarding the conclusions that were arrived at in 2016 and why they differ from the conclusions that we have arrived at at this point in time. To ensure full transparency, within the restrictions placed on us with regards to the disclosure of legal advice and commercial sensitivity, we will make available information as necessary to the Parliament and beyond.

On engagement with stakeholders, I have already made it clear that we engage regularly with the full range of stakeholders, including the GFG Alliance; Tata, with regards to this particular issue; local members; trade unions; and others in the local community and wider industry who have an interest in the matter and in the Scottish Government’s continued support to ensure that the jobs in the steel plants in Lanarkshire continue.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Having worked at Dalzell 35 years ago and at Clydebridge briefly before that, I was heartened that the Scottish Government acted to save the remains of an industry that lost 16,000 jobs in Scotland in the 1970s, under Labour, and 10,000 in the 1980s and 1990s, under the Tories. In addition to the 140 direct jobs, how many people working in the supply chain have had their jobs saved by the actions of the Scottish Government? I am interested in this answer because it is clear that the Opposition is not.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

To be honest, I find that hard to believe. Kenny Gibson must have had his short trousers on when he was working there, 35 years ago. I commend him for his efforts as a youngster in supporting Scotland’s steel sector.

As I identified, there are 140 direct jobs, but there are many more in the supply chain and in the wider communities that are dependent on the continued operation of the plants at Dalzell and Clydebridge. The Scottish Government took forward the complex transactions to make sure that the deals could go through, in order to save the sector, and that was absolutely the right thing to do.

We see great opportunities for the sector as we move into an environment where the net zero economy becomes more significant. We will have on-going conversations with the plants about how they can take advantage of that and continue to innovate and provide a strong future for themselves in the rapidly evolving steel sector.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Richard Leonard, who joins us remotely.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I was a member of the Scottish steel task force and my first priority is to save the jobs.

We know that Greensill Capital has collapsed, with losses of £1 billion, and we know that GFG Alliance is under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. We also know that, tomorrow, Audit Scotland will publish its audit of the Scottish Government’s consolidated accounts. Is that why the statement was rushed out today?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Richard Leonard is correct in saying that the focus is on saving jobs, which remains the priority. I am proud that we have been successful in that regard and that people have been in work over the past five years, which would not otherwise have been the case.

As I have said to other members, we made the statement to ensure that there is transparency for the Parliament.

The situation is a complex one that we have been working on as a consequence of the evolving situation at GFG, which has led us to look at all possible scenarios that might unfold. I am thankful that, despite the difficulties with Greensill, the GFG business continues to operate and the management team at the Lanarkshire plants continues to produce high-quality products to sell into a currently strong market. We continue to engage closely with the team.

The timing is a consequence of our having worked through complex issues over the past months, to understand the situation as it transpired. Detailed scenario planning on what the future might hold, then looking at previous transactions as a consequence of that, led us to a complete review of the work that was done in 2016. Out of that work came questions on which we took expert advice, so that we could understand the implications. That is why we made the statement today.

I reiterate that there is no financial liability for the Scottish Government as a consequence of what I have said today.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Minister, I must ask you to be a bit more succinct in your responses.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

Although the Scottish Government’s actions to save the Clydebridge and Dalzell plants have been welcome, members of the public will want to know that they were good value for taxpayers’ money. For clarity, can the minister provide an assurance that the contract has come at no cost to the Scottish taxpayer?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Yes, I can confirm that. The Scottish Government incurred no up-front costs from the transaction. As I said, we paid £1 and got that money back. Scottish Government officials supported work to complete the transaction as part of their normal range of duties and, as

I said, the news that I have shared with Parliament today does not create any financial liability for the Scottish Government.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Willie Rennie, who will join us remotely.

We will go to Colin Beattie and come back to Willie Rennie if we can sort out the link.

Colin Beattie (Scottish National Party, Midlothian North and Musselburgh)

Can the minister provide further information on the most recent assessment of the Lanarkshire plant’s productivity?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

I thank the member for that question, which is important because the plant’s survival is based on its ability to sell into the steel market.

As I said, officials regularly meet the local management team. It is heartening that, even during the current challenging circumstances, the plant continues to operate and to produce

high-quality steel plate, and that steps continue to be taken to increase the productivity of operations in the Lanarkshire plant. The Scottish Government is supportive of those steps, and I am kept regularly updated on the issue.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I gather that there is still an issue with Mr Rennie’s connection, so we will go to Maggie Chapman, who also joins us remotely.

I think that we have lost all the connections. I call Liz Smith, who is with us in person.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am here, Presiding Officer.

I listened carefully to the answers that the minister gave to Jamie Halcro Johnston and Daniel Johnson, but I do not think that I heard him tell them what they asked for. When did he find out that there had been a breach of the contract?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

As I thought I had made very clear, this has been a process of working through a range of questions then seeking clarification on the implications of the answers. Earlier this year, in light of the GFG situation, we started to assess the current situation at Dalzell, what its implications might be and what scenario planning could look like as a consequence. We also had a look back through previous transactions that took place in 2016.

During the course of that work, a number of issues were raised, and we sought expert advice in order to understand their implications. Clearly, we have had to have discussions back and forward in order to fully understand and to seek clarification of what are very complex transactions. We brought the statement to the Parliament as soon as we could—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

When?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

We brought this statement

to Parliament as soon as all our questions had been asked and answered, so that we had complete clarity on the situation and were able to articulate a statement that takes into account all the advice. Members would not expect us to come with a statement that was half baked—

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

When?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

We just became aware—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Excuse me, minister. Members who were not even in the chamber for the statement are now shouting; I ask Stephen Kerr, in particular, to pipe down and listen to the response from the minister.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

We brought the statement to Parliament as soon as we had clarified the answers in the advice, in order to ensure that we could deliver a robust statement that takes into account all the factors and information that are available at this time.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We still appear to be having connection problems, so I call Fulton MacGregor.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

As the representative of a constituency that has a proud steelworks heritage, including the Gartcosh finishing mill that was closed in 1986 to a huge public outcry—I was only six the at time, but my granddad worked there—I ask whether the minister can provide any further detail on the Scottish Government’s latest engagement with steel sector stakeholders regarding the challenges and opportunities that the sector faces in ensuring a safe and healthy future for steel in Scotland.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

As I said earlier, the Scottish Government is hugely focused on understanding how the sector is evolving and is watching that closely. I am a member of the UK steel council, which includes all the major steel producers across the UK and is chaired by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

There are huge opportunities for the steel sector in the move to a net zero economy. Zero Waste Scotland is looking at the circular opportunities for energy transition in Scotland. Its report, “How Should Scotland Manage its Scrap Steel?” speaks to that and is the first in a series of such reports that it will produce. I welcome the work that is being done by Zero Waste Scotland and others in the area, and I look forward to seeing the follow-up reports, which will help to inform our policy. That work is timely, given the emphasis that the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—placed on helping energy-intensive industries, such as the steel sector, as they move towards net zero.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am informed that Maggie Chapman can now join us remotely.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. We know that steel has been an important part of Scotland’s industrial landscape through providing jobs and materials that are much needed in our economy. I echo the minister’s remarks about the resilience of the workforce.

Given the issues surrounding GFG Alliance, which other members have mentioned, and the high-carbon nature of the steel industry, can the minister outline what role he expects the steel industry to play in Scotland’s future and how we can ensure that we retain the skills and expertise of the workforce in Scotland’s industrial future?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Briefly, please, minister.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

That is a good question. As I said, with regard to GFG, we are watching the situation closely and running extensive scenario planning on how we might respond to developments.

We absolutely understand the energy-intensive nature of the steel sector. There is a huge commitment in the sector in Scotland, the United Kingdom and internationally to move towards a net zero future and to decarbonise steel production, and there is a huge focus on the creation of green steel. That is something that we are very supportive of and on which we engage closely with people. Ensuring that there is a just transition for the sector and that the workers continue to be engaged in producing high-quality green steel in the future is something that we are focused on delivering for the workers and their communities and for people across Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Finally, I call Willie

Rennie. Mr Rennie, can you hear us?

That answers that question. Unfortunately, we need to pause briefly before we move on to the next item of business.

Economy (North-east Scotland)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place. Face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus.

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-02552, in the name of Liam Kerr, on backing the north-east economy.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Last week, in response to someone called Alex Salmond saying that the Scottish National Party Government had

“been dragged into student politics”

that would sacrifice and jeopardise

“the livelihoods of tens of thousands of Scots”,

an SNP spokeswoman said that we needed to

“get real on the climate emergency”.

They were both right. “Get real” means acknowledging that 78 per cent of Scotland’s total energy needs and 91 per cent of its heating are met from oil and gas. That is fuel and gas, which heats 24 million United Kingdom homes and goes towards making medicines, cosmetics, plastics, cleaning products, clothes and contact lenses. As Gary Smith of the GMB said, gas is

“a feedstock for the chemical industry ... our food supply ... our NHS”.

I ask Patrick Harvie, who is always keen to remind us that he rides a bike—sometimes even the right way up one-way streets—what he thinks the tyres are made from or the oil on the chain.

“Get real” means acknowledging that, in all scenarios given by the Climate Change Committee—all net zero compatible, incidentally—oil and gas account for around half of demand until 2050. Scotland has to get that from somewhere. Much of it already comes from abroad. It comes from Russia—that famous upholder of regulatory and environmental standards—to which we paid nearly £4 billion for oil and gas last year. It comes from Qatar, which sold to us £1 billion-worth of liquefied natural gas that has, according to the Oil and Gas Authority, more than double the carbon footprint of UK gas. It also comes from Norway which, to ensure that it can still sell us around £11 billion-worth of oil and gas, just licensed extraction in 136 blocks in the Barents Sea and exploration in the Arctic.

Conversely, local supply has advantages such as enhancing security of supply; protecting 100,000 jobs—around 65,000 of them in the North East Scotland region—while undertaking a fair and managed transition; avoiding inflicting ever-higher imported gas prices on the British consumer and plunging ever more of them into fuel poverty; and ensuring that we do not offshore our environmental responsibilities to the global south.

“Get real” means not lodging motions that refer to just transition funds about which, just last week, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy could tell me no detail so that I have had to write to her. It means not repeatedly saying “match that” when anyone who has the slightest knowledge of the industry knows that the UK Government’s £16 billion North Sea transition deal is happening now and aims to create 40,000 high-quality direct and indirect jobs. It also means—instead of boasting that offshore wind energy would create 28,000 posts by 2020 and then delivering fewer than 2,000 or boasting that 21,000 renewable energy jobs have been created but quietly forgetting that 130,000 were promised—fronting up, supporting the sector and working with it to deliver an actual transition.

“Get real” means that, when Siccar Point Energy postpones the Cambo project and immediately cuts 39 roles in Aberdeen, potentially forfeiting 1,000 jobs, a party of government does not respond by saying how “great” that is. It does not mean Ross Greer stating to Shell,

“Can’t wait till we seize your assets and prosecute your executives”,

or Maggie Chapman comparing the oil and gas industry, which is one of the most advanced industries in the world and key to our transition, to the stone age. It does not mean claiming that supporting oil and gas makes one “hard right”, or celebrating as tens of thousands face a Christmas fearing for their jobs, their livelihoods and their futures. Arrogance and hubris stalk the Greens like the jangling chains of Marley’s ghost but, just like the ghost, the people of Scotland will see right through them.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The member

can quote people out of context all he likes, but will he not acknowledge as a matter of fact that political parties of the left, centre and centre right, and even lifelong Conservatives such as John Gummer, have already got real and recognised that everlasting expansion of oil and gas extraction is not compatible with a serious response on the climate emergency?

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I am disappointed that the minister has completely failed to get my point. Nobody is arguing for unlimited oil and gas—the minister has clearly failed to listen, just as he failed to listen to the oil and gas industry and to most of the environmental industry when they were telling him something different.

However, the responsibility does not fall on the SNP’s subsidiary alone, for the latest developments were set off by Nicola Sturgeon’s abject failure to back our oil and gas industry. When it suited her, it was Scotland’s oil and the foundation for her future country.

Members may remember that, right at the start of the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—Michael Matheson was quoted as saying that an independent Scotland would continue drilling for oil and gas. Yet, as soon as the price fell and Nicola Sturgeon realised that supporting the industry might impact on her future job prospects, she threw her cabinet secretary under the bus and U-turned with deeply damaging comments about Scotland’s oil and gas. Just last week, when she was pressed by Douglas Ross, she failed to condemn the shameful, appalling comments of her ministerial colleague Patrick Harvie.

What a contrast that is with the leadership that has been shown in Norway. As Deirdre Michie of Oil & Gas UK said:

“Look at the statements of support from their Prime Minister. That gives people and companies confidence that that’s an area where you can go and invest, where you want to do your oil and gas operations, where the people and the skills will then underpin the energy transition.”

The last point is key—what will drive net zero is oil and gas companies that have the skills, the money and the business imperative to innovate, invent and transition. For example, BP is using its workforce to partner with Aberdeen City Council in the hydrogen hub; Equinor and Cadent are—as was reported today—announcing plans for a hydrogen town; and SGN is envisaging a pathway to 100 per cent hydrogen for Scotland’s gas networks, on which it has worked with oil and gas stalwart the Wood Group.

The conclusion is clear: we must “get real” about continuing demand, and how irresponsible and short-sighted it would be to satisfy that demand through imports. We must “get real” about recognising that, unless the Scottish Government starts to support our oil and gas industry and genuinely steps up to a fair and managed transition, new production will not go ahead, we will import from abroad and up to 100,000 workers in the oil and gas industry and associated industries will be thrown under the bus in favour of virtue signalling.

I urge Parliament to vote for the Conservative motion today; the SNP to take its spokeswoman’s advice to “get real”; Parliament to back our oil and gas industry; and all of us to consign the student politics of the Greens back to the stone age where they belong.

I move,

That the Parliament recognises that prematurely ending the oil and gas industry would decimate the economy of the north east of Scotland, and believes that it is irresponsible and counter to Scotland’s net zero ambitions to undermine the future of the industry and the jobs of tens of thousands of north east workers that rely on it.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Our oil and gas industry supports around 70,000 jobs in Scotland, and the sector continues to play an important role, not just in our economy but in delivering energy security. Crucially, even as we make the transition away from fossil fuels, as we must do, the sector will continue to have a vital role in ensuring Scotland’s energy security.

Of course, we must reduce our reliance on fossil fuels in line with our climate obligations, in a way that is fair and just. It is a journey on which Scotland has already embarked and which it needs to accelerate. We have made it clear that renewables and low-carbon jobs cannot replace oil and gas jobs immediately, which is why we are committed to ending our contribution to climate change quickly, in a way that is just and leaves no one behind.

A transition that puts 70,000 workers into unemployment or increases reliance on imports would not be a just one. That is why the Scottish Government is investing in a just transition, not just through our £75 million energy transition fund but through our continued support for projects such as Acorn and the Scottish Cluster. Those projects are critical to meeting our emissions reduction targets, as well as supporting the transition in the North Sea oil and gas sector.

The UK Government’s decision not to grant the Scottish Cluster full track 1 status was wrong, because it puts a just transition at risk and might have a negative impact on our environment and economy. Yet again, I urge the UK Government to accelerate the Scottish Cluster to full track 1 status without delay.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I do not entirely disagree with a lot of what has been said so far, but the cabinet secretary will acknowledge that the selection or not of Acorn was made on entirely objective criteria that all parties knew about.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Liam Kerr is aware

that the Scottish Cluster came through that assessment process very well. The decision not to progress with the project was made by the UK Government despite the fact that it had a good rating in the assessment. That is why—in the term that was used to me—the sector representatives were “flabbergasted” by the UK Government’s decision on that issue.

Over the course of the next four years, the emerging energy technologies fund, which we have set up, will invest £180 million in the development of projects that are based on hydrogen and carbon capture, utilisation and storage—CCUS—industries, to support the development of negative emissions technologies, which is an important role that they can play.

Next year, we will also commit the first £20 million of our £500 million just transition fund, to support Moray and the north-east of Scotland to become a centre of excellence for the transition to a net zero economy. We have repeatedly asked the UK Government to match that investment over the next 10 years to ensure that we deliver a just transition in the north-east.

Scotland also has some of the best offshore wind resources anywhere in Europe. Crown Estate Scotland’s current leasing round—the ScotWind process—is an opportunity for us to get first-mover advantage on floating wind projects anywhere in the world. The Scottish Government is determined to build on that strength, maximise our country’s offshore potential, reduce emissions and create good, green jobs. In 2020, Scotland generated some 940MW from offshore wind alone, and the recent announcement of a new manufacturing facility in Nigg is a great example of that. A location that is long associated with the oil and gas industry will now be home to the UK’s largest factory for steel towers for offshore wind turbines. That will create some 400 new jobs and more than 1,000 jobs across the supply chain. That is the type of transition that we want to happen across Scotland, including in the north-east.

The North Sea will continue to provide Scotland with an important level of domestic energy and, crucially, the infrastructure, skills and expertise of the sector can be a huge asset in helping us to achieve net zero. We believe that that will help Scotland to become a world leader in emerging technologies, such as CCUS, offshore wind and hydrogen.

The pact that was recently agreed in Glasgow at COP26 reaffirmed our commitment to achieving the Paris agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C. That means that it cannot be business as usual. We need to take bold and courageous decisions in order to do things differently.

In the spring, we will also deliver our first just transition plan as part of a refreshed energy strategy, and that will set out how the economic and social impacts of the transition will be managed. Work to engage and collaborate with those who stand to be most impacted by the transition will begin early in the new year.

I believe that, by working in partnership with our oil and gas sector and the wider energy sector in Scotland, we can ensure a prosperous and sustainable future for this and future generations—in the north-east of Scotland and beyond.

I move amendment S6M-02552.3, to leave out from “prematurely” to end and insert:

“the global climate emergency and the aims set out in the Glasgow Climate Pact require all countries to achieve the fastest possible Just Transition for the oil and gas sector; reaffirms that, for such a transition to be just, it must support the 70,000 workers whose employment depends on the sector in Scotland; understands that the growing domestic and global renewable industry provides a major employment opportunity for Scotland; welcomes the Scottish Budget for 2022-23, which will see almost £2 billion invested in tackling the climate emergency, including the first £20 million of the £500 million Just Transition Fund for the north east and Moray, and calls on the UK Government to match this investment in the industries and jobs of the future.”

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Before I call the next speaker, I remind all members who wish to speak in the debate to ensure that they have pressed their request-to-speak button.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

If we are to prevent the climate emergency from becoming a climate catastrophe, we are on borrowed time. However, we are also on borrowed time if we are to stop that climate crisis becoming a jobs crisis.

As we have heard, the oil and gas sector supports around 70,000 jobs in Scotland, most of which are in the north-east. There are 28,000 such jobs in Aberdeen alone and 10,000 in Aberdeenshire. The sector supports high-wage jobs across the whole country, including more than 1,000 in my South Scotland region. The industry is worth £19 billion a year in gross value added, which is 12 per cent of the Scottish economy. The industry’s impact is greatest in the north-east—it generates £14.6 billion in Aberdeen and more than £4 billion in neighbouring Aberdeenshire. In addition, the sector generates £106 million across the Highlands, Moray, Orkney and Shetland, and £39 million in South Scotland.

Oil and gas also continue to account for three quarters of the UK’s energy needs, with a quarter going on producing everyday goods, from medicines to the raw materials for wind turbine blade manufacturing. Even by 2050, half of our demand will still be met by oil and gas. Therefore, turning off the taps prematurely would have a devastating impact on the north-east economy, as well as in all our communities.

Winding up production too rapidly would not suppress demand for oil and gas; it would simply result in greater levels of imports, sometimes from regions with less stringent environmental and employment regulations. Gas imports are already at record levels and account for more than half of UK gas supplies. Do we really want to raise imports of oils from Russia above the already significant value of £3.2 billion?

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

If we are looking at importing more oil and gas, does the member agree that having projects such as Cambo come on stream would be a good thing, in order to limit the amount that we have to import?

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

Mr Lumsden will know that it is Shell that has pulled out of Cambo because it concluded that the economic case was not strong enough. He will also be aware that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report that was commissioned by the UK Government concluded that we cannot continue to pursue maximum economic recovery of fossil fuels.

It is crucial that we ensure that we have a just transition. I know that Mr Lumsden and his party do not understand what that is, but they should ask any mining community in my constituency about a just transition for energy workers.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

I will try to make some progress.

If we are to meet our climate targets, which are demanding—a 75 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2045—and also continue to secure jobs,

we cannot pursue the maximum economic recovery of fossil fuels. As I mentioned, that view is shared by the International Energy Agency. Therefore, we need to have a sensible debate and a balanced discussion about how we can protect jobs and energy security, as well as ensure that we transition to net zero. Crucially, we must make that transition in a just way, so that no worker is left behind, as many were recently by both the UK and Scottish Governments when oil prices fell, leading to thousands of job losses. That means that we need to up our game in Scotland to properly translate green energy growth into high-quality, secure, well-paid jobs, which is something that, so far, the Government has failed to do.

Workers and trade unions are sick and tired of the constant references, which we see again in the Government’s complacent amendment to the motion, promising jam tomorrow and more talk about opportunities for jobs in the renewables sector. They have heard it all before—we all remember Alex Salmond promising those opportunities, saying that we would be the “Saudi Arabia of renewables”. A decade on from the SNP pledge in its low-carbon economy strategy of annual growth of 4 per cent a year to 130,000 green jobs by 2020, the number of people who are directly employed in the low-carbon and renewables economy is just 21,400, which is the lowest since 2014.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

I will take an intervention if I can get the time back.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I can associate myself with an awful lot of the member’s comments, but does he support his colleague Monica Lennon’s motion, which in effect turns off the taps prematurely—something that he rightly fears?

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

Nobody on the Labour benches is proposing to turn off the taps prematurely. However, we need to start learning the lessons of the past, including the lessons from the closure of our mines and, most recently, the lessons from a decade of missed opportunities in securing offshore wind contracts for Scottish manufacturing.

We need a bold industrial strategy that lays out how domestic manufacturing capacity must evolve to ensure that the growth in domestic renewable energy production begins to translate into new jobs in Scotland. That means that both Governments, instead of bickering, need to work together. For example, we should not be signing contracts for offshore wind farms without a proper plan for supply chain manufacturing and ambitious conditions in relation to job creation in Scotland—something that the UK Government missed recently when it came to its announcement on funding for renewable energy.

We cannot repeat the past failures to recognise the manufacturing benefits of renewables by now failing to recognise the emerging job opportunities from the tens of billions of pounds of decommissioning work that will be needed in the North Sea in the decades ahead.

Scotland’s fabrication and decommissioning industries should be supported by requiring a significant proportion of local procurement from oil companies operating in the UK continental shelf region. That is what a proper just transition is, supported by a just transition commission with statutory backing. The transition also needs to be a jobs-first, worker-led transition, with a relentless focus on securing meaningful, well-paid, unionised jobs that are good for people and good for our planet. That means a partnership approach—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Smyth, I have given you the time back for the intervention, so please bring your remarks to a close now.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

No problem at all.

That means a partnership approach between Government and those workers who are most affected.

I am happy to move Labour’s amendment in my name, but I must also make clear that we cannot allow workers and communities to be left on the unemployment scrap heap as we transition to a modern, low-carbon economy. Our amendment recognises that such a transition can be just only when workers have a say on their futures, on their livelihoods and their—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Smyth, you really are quite over your time.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

I move amendment S6M-02552.2, to insert at end:

“; further believes that the Scottish Government must significantly step up its efforts to support the retention and creation of energy jobs in Scotland, and calls on the Scottish Government to set out a clear industrial plan, in consultation with trade unions and workers, particularly from the oil and gas sector, to secure a Just Transition for workers across Scotland.”

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

I am sorry to interrupt the debate, but it is my understanding that quite a lot of members across all the political parties are having great difficulty in accessing the debate online because BlueJeans seems to have frozen. I know that that was a problem during question time, too. Could the matter be investigated, please?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I understand that the point that Liz Smith draws to our attention is being urgently investigated. Members are being advised to watch proceedings on Scottish Parliament television.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

On a further point of order, Presiding Officer. Would it be possible to have a short suspension until the issue is sorted out? There are members who would like to participate in the debate.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you for your points of order, Ms Smith. I do not know the extent of the technical problem, but I think that the website is down. I propose that we suspend for 10 minutes. If, at that time, the issue has not been resolved, I am afraid that we will have to move on. I hope that that is a sensible way forward.

15:43 Meeting suspended.

15:53 On resuming—

Before we resume the debate, I will provide further clarification. I have been advised that there is a problem with the worldwide web. Therefore, we need—along with much of the rest of the world, I guess—to investigate what is happening, why it is happening and when it can be fixed. I imagine that that will have implications for what happens later in the afternoon. Please rest assured that those questions are being actively looked into by the chief executive’s office. Further information will be provided when it is available, so that members know exactly what is happening in respect of there being a deferral of decision time or whatever else is the best way forward.

In the meantime, we will continue with the debate. I call Liam McArthur.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I thank you, Presiding Officer, and Liz Smith for trying to maximise the online viewing ratings for my speech. I will try not to disappoint.

There is clearly a sense in which this is groundhog day: we seem to have been having this debate, in some guise, weekly. I certainly do not begrudge that, given the urgency of the climate emergency and the importance of ensuring a just transition. In the amendment that I lodged, I sought to reinforce—as Colin Smyth set out in his speech—the need to secure the future of workers and communities and to deliver tens of thousands of good green jobs.

I thank Liam Kerr for his motion, which does not seem unreasonable on the face of it, although I am not entirely clear how far short of maximum extraction it would leave us. We need to accept that some of the resource will have to be left in the ground.

Even so, it is worth taking a moment to reflect on the current contribution of the oil and gas sector. There is no doubt that it has been economically significant, both in terms of gross value added and in terms of jobs. That is the case right across the country—perhaps more significantly in the north-east but, I argue, also in the Highlands and Islands to no smaller extent, proportionally. That adds further weight to the argument for specific attention being paid to a just transition in that region.

As Liam Kerr acknowledged, all the scenarios from the UK Climate Change Committee anticipate oil and gas accounting for up to or around 50 per cent of total cumulative energy demand up to 2050. That might reflect a marked reduction from where we are now, but it remains significant. It also underlines the need to bear down on demand and to avoid simply displacing domestic production with imports of more environmentally impactful products and more problematic security of supply.

People who work in the oil and gas sector recognise the need for an energy transition. Recent polling appears to suggest that there is a real appetite among those who work in the sector to see the transition taking place. The important thing for Government and its agencies is to make it as easy as possible.

There is an obvious read across to the needs of the renewable energy sector, but it would be overly simplistic just to say that that is where the transition will go. There will be many other sectors that can take advantage of the skills of people from the oil and gas sector. It is incumbent on Government and agencies to do more to raise awareness of options and to make the transfer as smooth as possible, including through any retraining or skills development that are needed.

We will happily support the amendment in Colin Smyth’s name; I am slightly more reluctant about Michael Matheson’s amendment. For the record, Scottish Liberal Democrats certainly do not, at this stage, welcome the Scottish budget, and not just because it clobbers local authorities across the country. It also falls short of helping us to meet our climate objectives. Questions have already been asked about what the £500 million energy transition fund is actually made up of and whether it will turn out to be more smoke and mirrors.

It would be helpful, in that context, if the minister or the cabinet secretary could set out the year 1 objectives for the £20 million that has been referred to. How many workers will actually benefit, and what are the predicted investments in future years? In the context of the UK Climate Change Committee’s recent criticism of the Scottish Government’s lack of detail on plans to achieve net zero, those and other questions become ever more crucial and central.

As I have said in the context of previous debates, the creation of new green jobs will be key in a just transition. We have had the promises before, but we cannot now afford to leave people and communities behind. Achieving that transition will require that plans be both radical and credible. We need to bring people with us, and that will rest heavily on credibility, including the credibility of people in the oil and gas sector. Change is unavoidable, but only with detailed plans and proper resourcing can there be any hope of achieving the transition in a managed way.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

There are now two distinct visions of the North Sea’s future. On one hand, we have the potential for a just transition, ushering in a new age of prosperity for Scotland. Decommissioning will play a central role, with up to £50 billion being invested in the North Sea by 2040. The potential exists to support thousands of jobs, either directly or through supply chains—jobs that oil and gas workers are well placed to fill, given their highly transferable skill sets.

However, we need a circular economy in order to properly tap that potential. For example, why scrap a pipeline when it is worth five times as much in the construction sector? Together, improved reuse, better remanufacturing and higher-value recycling could increase the value of assets—including steel, valves, vessels and tanks—by as much as 25 per cent. Alongside a digital tracking system for new or replacement assets, we can ensure through quick response—QR—codes, for example, that we extract as much of that value as possible.

We should also capitalise on the huge steel smelting potential. Typically, 94 per cent of oil and gas platforms’ steel is smelted, so having an electric arc furnace in Scotland makes perfect sense in terms of helping to recycle the estimated 5.5 million tonnes of steel that are available on the UK continental shelf. That would create skilled jobs, reduce carbon impacts and reduce constraint payments. Once again, I urge the Government to explore that opportunity.

All that work requires close co-operation with the oil and gas sector. It makes sense that we co-operate, because even the UK CCC forecasts that oil and gas will continue to provide up to 50 per cent of our energy demand to 2050.

The sensible approach is to ensure that the industry makes the minimum possible impact on the environment, which is why the North Sea transition deal focuses on reducing production emissions and will get a boost from UK plans to quadruple offshore wind generation by making electrification of oil and gas platforms easier by tying them to offshore generation.

Set against our sensible and sustainable vision is the extreme position that the Greens are pushing. They want North Sea oil and gas to be shut down as quickly as possible. One of their ministers called for the shutdown to start next year. Meanwhile, their other minister openly celebrates Scottish oil and gas jobs being put at risk. It is the stuff of student politics—treating the oil and gas sector as an enemy and its workers as an afterthought.

The SNP seems to be happy to go along with that approach and shows no sign of putting in the work that is needed. Years late, there is still no circular economy bill; no industrial road map—which is critical for carbon capture and storage—and no word on the Scottish offshore floating wind industry getting the support that it needs in order that it can compete. The Scottish Government set an arbitrary limit of 100MW for Scottish projects and expects them to compete with the 300MW projects that will exist throughout the rest of the UK.

The failures are mounting even higher. Emissions, recycling and green jobs targets have not been met, and the Scottish Government cannot even deliver a 1990s deposit return scheme after working on it for a decade.

Let us remember that 100,000 jobs depend on the oil and gas sector. Those workers need certainty for the future. I know which of our two visions they trust to deliver that.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

This morning, I he

ld a joint meeting with Scottish Renewables and the Scottish Cluster. At that meeting, we considered the opportunities for both sectors regarding the supply chain—encouragement of local supply chain development, manufacturing opportunities, developing a skilled workforce and working with local skills agencies, colleges and universities. I know from discussions with OGUK that it is keen to engage with both the Scottish Cluster and the renewables sector on that.

The cost of retrofitting properties in Scotland is estimated to be about £33 billion, according to a study by the University of Glasgow. The 2 per cent population share of my East Lothian constituency would mean £750 million in that sector alone.

Last week, in the Scottish Government net zero debate, I touched on a meeting with Scottish Renewables and SNP colleagues at which we heard about opportunities for the renewables sector to deliver an additional 17,000 jobs with an additional £33 billion of GVA by 2030. In that same debate, I mentioned a recent report by Robert Gordon University, which stated that 90 per cent of oil and gas industry jobs

“have medium to high skills transferability”

into green and net zero industries.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I have only four minutes and I want to get through my speech because I have points to make.

There are opportunities for all sectors to work together.

The Scottish Cluster also recently published the key findings of a report on the employment impact of the Scottish Cluster in Scotland. Storegga Geotechnologies, which was the lead developer of the Acorn project on behalf of the Scottish Cluster, commissioned the report. The Scottish Cluster found that it could support an average of 15,100 jobs between 2022 and 2050, comprising 6,200 direct jobs and 8,900 supply chain jobs. Total Scottish Cluster jobs were expected to peak at 20,600 in 2031. If the UK Government had accepted the project as a track 1 project, it would have started to support jobs as early as 2022.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

No. I am sorry. I do not have time—I have only four minutes.

The initial project build phase would have supported 15,000 jobs straight away. Who is letting the north-east down now?

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

No. I am sorry.

That would have been bad enough, but the Conservatives’ shambolic handling of the Peterhead carbon capture and storage project in 2015 just adds insult to injury.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

No. Only this week—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Excuse me. The member has indicated quite a few times that he is not giving way. As you know, it is up to members to decide whether they will take interventions. Please resume, Mr McLennan.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The truth is having an impact here, Presiding Officer.

Only this week, Professor Stuart Haszeldine, who is the carbon capture and storage expert at the University of Edinburgh, said that there is “no advantage” in the project’s selection as a reserved bidder.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member give way on that point?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

No.

He also said that carbon capture projects are “fundamental” to Scotland meeting its net zero targets by 2045. He stated:

“It just means you have to go to a lot of meetings but there’s very little chance of one of the other bidders being declared void so you’re effectively being asked to run on the spot with very little or no funding.”

I ask again, who is letting the north-east down now?