Scottish Parliament, 24 February 2022

274 contributions from 71 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

The first item of business is general questions. In order to get in as many people as possible, I would be grateful for short and succinct questions, and responses to match.

Island Ferry Services

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reported warnings from residents, business and advocacy groups that the current quality of ferry service represents a real threat to island life. (S6O-00780)

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

The Scottish Government takes seriously the views of those groups. The aim is to make communities across Scotland, including island and remote mainland communities, attractive places to live, work, bring up families and move to, so that Scotland’s population profile provides a platform for sustainable and inclusive economic growth and wellbeing.

The importance of transport links, including ferry services, is fully recognised as a key factor for island communities, to assist individual residents in, for example, their access to services and enjoyment of fundamental human rights.

As part of our commitment to our island and remote communities, the Scottish Government has announced investment of £580 million in ports and vessels to support and improve Scotland’s ferry services over the next five years, as part of our wider infrastructure investment plan.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the minister at least accept that the failure of the shipbuilding programme for Caledonian MacBrayne has played a key part in harming the quality of life for islanders and marginalised communities in Scotland, and will she commit to a national shipbuilding strategy and a continuous shipbuilding programme that is centred around the public sector procurement contract for Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd, in order to build a proper, sustainable shipbuilding industry in Scotland that will help provide lifeline services for communities in the islands?

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

I mentioned the investment of £580 million in ports and vessels over the next five years. W

e are working constructively with key partners on that. This afternoon, I will meet CalMac Ferries. I will also meet island MSPs and the chair of the community board at CalMac.

In 2018-19, we invested in a resilience fund to look at ferry services to ensure that there was future reliability and availability of vessels, which I recognise as a challenge, given an ageing fleet. The member asked me to commit to a national shipbuilding plan. I will not do that in the chamber; however, I am meeting Mr Sweeney later, on a separate issue that relates to my portfolio responsibilities, at which meeting I will be more than happy to discuss that in further detail.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

As someone who lives on Islay, I have experienced the vagaries of the ferry service. However, the quality of island life is overwhelmingly positive. Yet again, Labour has cast life on the islands in a negative light, while the Scottish Government is actively taking steps to tackle depopulation throughout the islands. Does the minister therefore share my view that that latest example of Labour rhetoric, which may potentially discourage people who are considering moving to the islands, is both entirely partisan and extremely unhelpful in the image that it portrays?

The Presiding Officer

Be brief, minister.

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

We need to make our islands attractive places to live in, as Jenni Minto has alluded to. She lives on Islay, so she recognises some of the challenges, more so than I. However, there have been extended periods of extreme weather, recently, which have directly impacted on the viability of a number of services. As I mentioned to Mr Sweeney, I will be speaking to CalMac about those issues later today—as I will to Ms Minto and a number of other colleagues who represent island communities. It is absolutely essential that we get those services right for the people who live in our island communities.

Home Insulation Programmes (North East Scotland)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the roll-out of the home insulation programmes in the north-east. (S6O-00781)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

In the financial year 2022-23, we will invest £336 million in our heat, energy efficiency and fuel poverty programmes.

Since 2013, we have allocated £61 million through our area-based schemes to tackle fuel poverty in North East Scotland. Those projects have benefited more than 18,000 fuel-poor households. Vulnerable families in the north-east will also benefit from the home insulation delivered through our warmer homes Scotland service, and we continue to provide free and impartial advice through our Home Energy Scotland service, which includes advice about relevant grant and loan schemes to help to meet the costs of improved home insulation.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for his response and the information that he provided. Given the cost-of-living crisis that we face, and the significant role of rising energy bills in that, can he outline how the Scottish Government can maximise insulation and other measures to keep bills as low as possible, and what more we can and should all be doing in the longer term to tackle issues in the retrofit supply chain?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The heat in buildings strategy, which we published recently, goes into those issues in great depth. The strategy has to be seen in the new context of the cost-of-living crisis. The Scottish Government is doing what it can to support people through the current cost-of-living crisis in a broader sense, including through our winter support fund and other aspects of our social security spending, which go beyond the resources allocated by the United Kingdom Government.

On the longer-term development of the supply chain, we believe that there are some 16,400 good-quality jobs for Scotland that can be created through the zero-emissions heating agenda. That will go hand in hand with the regulatory approach that we are taking to make sure that all housing, in all tenures, achieves a good band of energy performance, as well as conversion to zero-emissions heating.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

In December, I asked what the best and most cost-effective way was to insulate traditional granite homes, such as are found in the north-east, in Aberdeen. The minister responded that Aberdeen home owners could install solid wall insulation and suggested that loans of up to £10,000 were available.

I assume that the minister researched the answer before giving it, so can he give me an indicative ball-park price for installing solid wall insulation in a traditional granite home in Aberdeen? Given the extreme disruption and building work required, how long, roughly, does it take?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I am afraid that I do not have that precise data with me at the moment, but I will write to the member and see whether we can answer the question in detail.

Dentists (National Health Service Patients)

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it can take to encourage dentists to continue treating national health service patients. (S6O-00782)

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

We are doing everything that we can to support NHS dentistry and we will put patients at the centre of a sustainable public service. We are rapidly moving forward with NHS dental recovery and aim to return to more normal levels of activity as soon as infection prevention and control restrictions allow.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank the minister for that answer, but it was not clear what support the Government is providing. Does the minister understand why a third of dentists who were surveyed by the British Dental Association are considering leaving the profession, despite what the Government said? Every day, I have constituents who are being told, for example, that they have to wait months for NHS treatment, when they could get the same treatment in days if they go private.

Does the minister accept that, in the short term, reducing Covid support will exacerbate the problem and, in the long term, it is clear that the model is broken and we need a comprehensive review of dental services, with far greater integration with our NHS?

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

In the short term, we need to focus on recovery. We need to get more patients seen by more dentists. In the longer term, I do not disagree; I think that there is a need for reform.

I would dispute that there has not been good support. I will reiterate, as I did in the chamber yesterday, that we are looking at a 9 per cent increase in the budget for NHS dental services this year. Just this month, there has been an additional sum of £20 million through increased fees to provide enhanced examinations. We have provided £50 million of support for dentists and £35 million for personal protective equipment. We have provided £5 million for ventilation improvements and £7.5 million for the purchase of new drills. We have also assured the profession that we are not looking at a cliff edge at the end of this year, in terms of withdrawing support; we are looking at a soft landing, where we rejoin the link between financial reward and seeing patients. We need dentists to see more NHS patients.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Key to returning NHS dental services is the recruitment and retention of dental nurses. In Orkney, that is proving exceptionally difficult under the current funding model, with staff even being poached by the public dental service, due to the disparity in pay and conditions. Will the minister agree to look at that specific issue and even at whether dental nurses providing NHS dental services can all be brought under the same pension provision?

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

I am certainly willing to look at that. The last thing that we would want is the displacement of a problem that is happening in one part of the dental provision to another part. We need the whole dental service to recover. If the member is willing to write to me with the specifics of that inquiry, I will be more than happy to look into it and try to sort it.

Island Ferry Services

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to ensure that islanders are not left without food supplies due to the reported lack of resilience of the ferry fleet. (S6O-00783)

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

The Scottish Government works with CalMac Ferries Ltd to ensure that islanders are not left without food supplies and that essential welfare provision is maintained. During periods of disruption, CalMac will assess all the options to maximise available capacity across the network. CalMac will prioritise traffic to ensure that food and other lifeline supplies and services are available on the islands.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

EY’s project Neptune report into the flawed tripartite structure for procuring and running ferries has been with Transport Scotland for five months. Will the minister commit to publishing it now and making a statement to Parliament?

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

I am more than happy to give Mr Simpson that assurance and to make a parliamentary statement.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Our island communities have always had to contend with bad weather, but fortunately they have not also had to contend with a Tory Government—instead they have had the benefit of a Scottish National Party Government, which has invested more than £2.2 billion in the Clyde and Hebrides and northern isles ferry services, bringing new routes, new vessels, upgraded harbour infrastructure and the roll-out of significantly reduced fares through the road equivalent tariff scheme. Does the minister agree that it is disingenuous and likely to cause undue alarm for Mr Simpson to suggest that the food security of Scotland’s island communities is in jeopardy?

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

In the event of disruption to supplies having an impact on the health or wellbeing of island residents, we will work with local resilience partnerships and our established multiagency response teams to develop solutions. Our ferry operators, in very difficult circumstances, take every opportunity to exploit those weather windows where they have arisen, with the option of running amended or additional sailings if needed in order to prioritise supplies and to prevent such a situation from arising.

The period of weather disruption that I mentioned previously, combined with some issues with vessel resilience, brings into sharp focus the essential nature of the lifeline connectivity that our ferry services provide to our island communities. That is why Scottish ministers have committed to investing £580 million in our ferry infrastructure over the course of the next five years.

Fish Processing Industry

Karen Adam (Scottish National Party, Banffshire and Buchan Coast)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what support is available to ensure that more fish caught by Scottish vessels are landed and processed at Scottish ports. (S6O-00784)

Mairi Gougeon (Scottish National Party, Angus North and Mearns)

The Scottish Government is due to introduce amended economic link provisions in January 2023 to help to ensure that greater amounts of quota stocks are landed in Scottish ports. We will also be producing a new seafood trade strategy, which will set out our vision to ensure that Scotland has a thriving, sustainable and diverse Scottish seafood industry that revitalises coastal communities.

Through the marine fund Scotland, £6 million has supported Scottish processing facilities to upgrade their premises and improve automation, to help to enhance the opportunity for Scottish-landed catches to have value added in Scotland.

Karen Adam (Scottish National Party, Banffshire and Buchan Coast)

The Scottish Government has a strong track record of supporting the fishing industry on the Banffshire and Buchan coast, most recently with the additional £1.8 million of funding for ports and harbours, which was announced last year, which benefited Fraserburgh, Peterhead and Macduff.

However, given that Scotland is entitled to receive at least £62 million annually to replace the European maritime and fisheries fund, can the cabinet secretary tell us what impact Brexit has had on funding for the vital projects and infrastructure that support our fishing communities, such as those in my constituency?

Mairi Gougeon (Scottish National Party, Angus North and Mearns)

The impact of Brexit has been significant, not only because of the losses and dislocation of markets, but also because of the reduction in quota available for Scottish vessels. The member is right in what she has said. Following EU exit, we provided clear evidence to the UK Government for a multi-year allocation for marine funding of £62 million per annum, given that that is what we could have accessed as an EU member. However, instead, the UK Government has allocated only £14 million a year to Scotland. That fails to recognise the value and importance of Scotland’s seas.

In addition, it appears that the yearly £5.5 million top-up that was previously provided to Scotland on the basis that the EU maritime and fisheries fund allocation was insufficient will not continue. That means that, in real terms, the funding available to support the seafood sectors, enhance the marine environment and improve biodiversity has received a 28 per cent cut compared with that in the previous three years.

Ultimately, a reduced funding pot means that there is reduced opportunity to realise the benefits for coastal communities, marine businesses and the marine environment in Scotland. However, we will continue to use the limited funding that we have to deliver maximum effect through the marine fund Scotland.

Food Waste (Climate Change)

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to reduce any adverse effects of food waste on climate change. (S6O-00785)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government’s 2019 “Food Waste Reduction Action Plan” set a target of a 33 per cent reduction in food waste by 2025. The delivery of that plan is on-going and is supported by Zero Waste Scotland.

I am taking action. Yesterday I launched phase 2 of our food waste marketing campaign to highlight links between food waste and climate change, and to encourage people to buy what they need and eat what they buy and recycle food waste that they cannot prevent.

A review of the plan will be published this year. That will identify additional areas of action that are required to meet the 2025 target.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The minister will be aware that, if food waste were a country, it would be the third largest greenhouse gas emitter behind China and the USA. In fact, food waste contributes four times the amount of greenhouse gas that the global aviation industry does. Does the minister agree that not enough emphasis has been put on tackling food waste and that we must stop vilifying our food producers?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Brian Whittle is absolutely right that we must not vilify our food producers, that everybody can work together to tackle food waste, and that food waste is an important contributor to climate emissions.

ME and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what steps are being taken to ensure access to care and support planning by a specialist team for people with ME and chronic fatigue syndrome, as recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (S6O-00786)

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

The Scottish Government welcomes the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline on ME and chronic fatigue syndrome, which was published last October. We have commissioned an independent organisation to engage with the third sector, people with lived experience and clinical stakeholders to discuss how we can move forward in implementing the NICE guideline recommendations in Scotland and, on a broader front, identifying and practically addressing priorities for service improvement in care for people with ME/CFS.

I look forward to meeting #MEAction Scotland representatives on 3 March, which is next week, and directly hearing their views on improving the access to care and support for people who are affected by ME/CFS.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and all its variants has caused significant damage to people and families throughout Scotland, and we know that ME/CFS can be triggered by infection in patients, although susceptibility may have a genetic element. Does the minister therefore agree that access to care and specialist support is essential for those who are currently diagnosed? What work is being undertaken to identify any lasting effects from Covid infections that may lead to the development of ME/CFS?

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

We are committed to ensuring that everyone who is living with ME/CFS in Scotland is able to access the best possible care and support and benefit from healthcare services that are safe and effective and put people right at the centre of their care.

Our approach in responding to long Covid is to support national health service boards to develop models of care that will be of benefit to the management of other long-term and complex conditions. Our chief scientist office is supporting nine major research projects through £2.5 million of funding. They are expected to contribute significantly to the clinical knowledge of the long-term effects of Covid-19, including to understanding more fully the nature of long Covid and possible treatments for it.

Distress Brief Intervention Programme

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

8. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how the distress brief intervention programme is supporting people experiencing mental health crises. (S6O-00787)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

The award-winning distress brief intervention programme is a flagship programme that provides personalised compassionate support to people who present to front-line services in emotional distress and do not require emergency clinical services. DBI provides practical support that helps people to understand and manage their distress. As such, it forms a core element of the Government’s work on improving responses for people who are experiencing mental health crisis.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

The distress brief intervention programme was, in part, introduced to create a coherent approach to

addressing mental health crises. With that in mind, will the minister say what is being done to ensure that access to mental health services is consistent across Scotland, and in particular for those living in rural or island communities?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Ms Roddick asks an important question. DBI is available nationally through NHS24. In the Highlands and Islands, Inverness is one of the pilot areas for DBI. The programme is also now available in Moray and Orkney and is expected to go live in Argyll and Bute and in the Western Isles in the spring.

More generally, mental wellbeing support can be accessed through an individual’s general practitioner or from NHS24 or the Breathing Space service. Anyone who feels that they might cause immediate harm to themselves can reach out for help by dialling 999.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes general questions.

First Minister’s Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Before questions, I invite each party leader to make a short statement on the situation in Ukraine.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Parliament will discuss the unfolding situation in Ukraine later and will express its solidarity with a country whose very existence as an independent democracy is now under attack. However, at this first sitting since Russia’s full-scale invasion, I condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the unprovoked imperialist aggression of Vladimir Putin.

There can be no doubt that he must now face the severest of consequences: sanctions on him and his network of oligarchs and agents, and their expulsion from countries across the world; sanctions on his banks and their ability to borrow and function; sanctions on his energy and mineral companies; and, here in the United Kingdom, an immediate clean-up of the swirl of dirty Russian money in the City of London.

Just as Putin must face and feel the wrath of the democratic world, the people of Ukraine must feel and not just hear our support and solidarity. The world must now help and equip Ukraine to defend itself and resist Russian aggression. We must ensure humanitarian aid and assistance and we must all stand ready to offer refuge and sanctuary, where necessary, for those who may be displaced.

This is a critical juncture in history, and perhaps the most dangerous and potentially defining moment since the second world war. We live in this moment, but it is true to say that historic precedents will be set in the hours and days to come. Those will determine the new norms of what is or is not acceptable in our international order.

Putin is an autocrat. His control of the apparatus of state and of the economy, the military and the media can make his power seem impregnable. However, as with most strongman leaders, underneath the veneer of power lie insecurity and fear. There is fear of democracy and of freedom, and fear of the kind of popular uprisings witnessed over recent years in Ukraine ever happening in Russia.

On that point, let us not assume that he is now acting in the name of the Russian people. We must ensure that anti-Putin forces within Russia also have our encouragement and moral support.

Future generations will judge the actions that the world takes in this moment. There are, of course, many complexities but, at its most fundamental, this is a clash between oppression and autocracy on one hand and freedom and democracy on the other. We must all ensure that freedom and democracy prevail. [

Applause

.]

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The world that we woke up to this morning is a far darker and more unstable place than when we went to sleep last night. I said on Tuesday that the situation in Ukraine was at the forefront of all our minds. Since then, the escalation in the aggression by Russia towards Ukraine confirms that President Putin’s only intention was war, no matter what the cost.

The cost will be high. In the first few hours, lives have already been lost and the images of people fleeing the cities of Ukraine and the videos from those who have stayed behind capturing the invasion are difficult for us all to watch. That must be so much more difficult for Ukrainians here in Scotland and across the UK and for anyone with friends, family or loved ones still in the country.

The pain of war is felt by people. Families will lose loved ones and whole communities will be displaced. Children will be left with lifelong scars, both physical and mental. I always thought and hoped that war on this scale in Europe was something that I would know of only through history lessons in school but, sadly, after this morning, it is part of our daily lives once again.

I support the United Kingdom Government and allies around the world in their condemnation of this Russian war and their united efforts to avert further bloodshed. We can only hope and pray that they will succeed. We stand with the people of Ukraine. [

Applause

.]

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Today, a hard-won and fragile peace in Europe has been shattered. It is a dark day, and my party and I stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. Vladimir Putin’s attack on Ukraine is unprovoked and unjustifiable. Across the world today, the message is clear: peace and democracy must prevail, and we will not bend to Vladimir Putin’s imperial ambitions.

Our first actions now must be to support the Ukrainian people. In supporting the fight against Russian aggression, we must provide urgent humanitarian assistance to defeat the horrors of war: hunger, destitution and need. The UK must urgently reinforce our North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies; the hardest possible sanctions must be taken against all those who are linked to Putin; and the influence of Russian money and disinformation must be extricated from public and political life in the UK, including here in Scotland.

The message from this Parliament must be loud and clear. We stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. Peace will prevail. Vladimir Putin will pay a heavy price. [

Applause

.]

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

On behalf of the Scottish Green Party, I offer our solidarity with the people of Ukraine in this moment of crisis.

Ukraine is a sovereign democratic nation whose people have the inalienable right to self-determination. It is a European nation, as its people have made clear by majority, time after time in recent years. Today’s escalation of a Russian invasion that started in 2014 is a flagrant and grievous breach of international law, which must be responded to in the most comprehensive terms. No form of sanction should be off the table. Action against Russian state-backed corporations and other entities must be swift, and here in the UK it is essential that we tackle the money-laundering networks that are used extensively by Russian elites.

It now seems inevitable that there will be a significant flow of refugees from Ukraine in the coming days, weeks and months. I trust that Scotland stands ready to play our part to support them in any way that we can. Let us all hope, even at this hour, that a prolonged war can be prevented, as the devastation that that would bring does not bear thinking about.

We are proud to stand with the people and the Government of Ukraine, and I am very pleased that that message is coming from the entire chamber. [

Applause

.]

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I rise to offer the solidarity of Scottish Liberal Democrats with the people of Ukraine.

We awoke this morning to a much darker world. A few hours ago, for the first time this century, a land war has begun in continental Europe and we have no idea how it will end. The Russian regime has violated the sovereignty of a democratic state, broken international law and threatened the very fabric of peace and security in our world. It is very likely that the invasion will lead to a catastrophic and wholly needless loss of human life. It will displace thousands of Ukrainians, and we must be ready to help.

The city of Kyiv is twinned with the city of Edinburgh. That relationship has to mean something, so we must be prepared to offer all those who are fleeing that conflict safe harbour in the villages and towns of Scotland. Today, the Parliament and all parties in it speak with one voice. We utterly condemn the expansionist aggression of the Russian regime and stand in total solidarity with the people of Ukraine. [

Applause

.]

National Health Service (Recovery Plan)

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. Does the First Minister have full confidence in her Government’s national health service recovery plan?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, I do, but the Government will continue to work hard to ensure that the recovery plan continues to develop, evolve and be fit for the purpose of getting the NHS through the remainder of Covid and on to a path not only of recovery but of sustainability for the future.

Audit Scotland has, of course, this morning published its regular review of the NHS. I welcome that report. It is challenging but fair and balanced. The report recognises that the task that all Governments face of recovering their health services from Covid is difficult and that there are no easy answers, but it also fairly recognises the work that the Government and the NHS have done throughout Covid and are doing as we enter into recovery from Covid. It also recognises the plans that the Scottish Government is now implementing with the NHS to ensure sustainability for the future.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

“Yes, I do”. Those three simple words from the First Minister confirm that everything that she has put forward in her NHS recovery plan has her backing. It is what she believes to be the way of getting our health service out of the struggles of the pandemic. However, it is a different view from that of Audit Scotland, which gave a damning verdict this morning on the Government’s plan to rebuild Scotland’s NHS. It states:

“There is not enough detail in the plan to determine whether ambitions can be achieved in the timescales set out.”

There is not enough detail in the plan that, moments ago, the First Minister said she is happy with. Will she accept that the recovery plan does not go far enough and urgently needs to be redrafted to address the serious concerns that have been highlighted?

The First Minister

No, I do not agree with that. However, I agree—I said this in my initial answer—that the Government must ensure the implementation of that recovery plan and must ensure that it is flexible and adaptable so that it is fit for the very significant challenge that Scotland faces and, indeed, countries across the world face in recovering our health services from the pandemic.

Today’s Audit Scotland report is very fair and challenging. People can go and read it for themselves. It also sets out and acknowledges the work that is under way. For example, page 3 of the report says that Scottish Government plans have

“the potential to help the NHS become sustainable”.

Later on, the report says:

“The Scottish Government recognises that the risks relating to workforce capacity and wellbeing are significant”

and

“has introduced a range of controls to mitigate”

those risks. It also says that

“The Scottish Government and NHS are implementing lessons learned during the pandemic”

and

“The Scottish Government’s plans for the recovery and redesign of NHS services are ambitious”,

although it goes on to say that they are “challenging”. It further says:

“The NHS has implemented a range of new ways of working to improve access to healthcare services”.

That recognises and records the work that is under way.

Finally, I simply note that we are investing record sums in the national health service. I think that it is just over £100 per head more than equivalent investment south of the border, which I think equates to £600 million more being spent on the NHS than would be the case if we followed the investment of the United Kingdom Government. There are also record numbers of people working in our national health service.

I recognise the challenge. It is perhaps one of the biggest challenges that faces us and other Governments, but we are focused on it, the recovery plan will help us to address it and we will continue to ensure that the plan and the resources that back it up are fit for the scale of that challenge.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I notice that the First Minister picked elements of the report that were positive for her Government but failed to address the substance of my question, which was about the lack of detail—“not enough detail” is in the report—and the lack of clarity on the timescales that need to be met to reach the ambitions that are set out in the plan.

The First Minister also mentioned that there are record numbers of people in the workforce, but the report makes it plain that the recovery plan will fail unless the Government recruits enough people with the right skills. It highlights vacancies being at record highs throughout the health service.

Scotland’s NHS staff have gone above and beyond throughout the pandemic to keep the public safe, but they are now stretched to their limit. Today, on top of the damning Audit Scotland publication, there are reports of junior doctors who are exhausted, burnt out and even leaving Scotland to work in health services elsewhere. How will the First Minister’s plan to cut down waiting times achieve the desired outcomes when staff are at breaking point or, worse, preparing to leave our NHS?

The First Minister

First, we have record numbers of staff working in our national health service and, of course, those numbers do not include vacancies; they are staff in post. However, we recognise the recruitment challenges and, as Audit Scotland recognises, we are investing in the wellbeing of staff as well as investing heavily in recruitment. Douglas Ross suggested that I had selectively quoted Audit Scotland’s report. I am absolutely clear that it is a very challenging report and that it has real lessons for the Scottish Government, but it recognises fairly the work that we have been doing. On the topic of selective quoting, I note that the Audit Scotland report says about staffing that

“the UK’s departure from the EU ”

will

“further reduce the pool of workers available in future years”.

That is another reality that is exacerbating the recruitment challenge, and Douglas Ross might want to reflect on that when he next gets to his feet.

These are big challenges, so we are meeting them with investment and support for staff. With regard to the detail in the recovery plan, the plan sets out our ambitions and the broad plans that we will implement to meet those ambitions. Of course, we have also asked health boards to produce detailed implementation plans, which they will deliver next month, so that the detail of implementation is there and we can scrutinise that and hold them to account.

Nobody should underplay the scale of the challenge that countries everywhere face in getting their health services back on track, but we are supporting the health service with investment, we are supporting staff and we will focus on ensuring that our health service recovers and is firmly on a path to sustainability for the future.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The Audit Scotland report lays bare that Scotland’s NHS is on an emergency footing. New evidence, which was submitted this morning to the Parliament’s COVID-19 Recovery Committee, spells out the true cost of this Government’s failure. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine has said that delayed accident and emergency admissions in Scotland led to

“over 500 excess deaths in 2021”.

Its evidence to the committee this morning states that those avoidable deaths are

“entirely attributable to the delay to admission these patients experienced.”

Five hundred lives were lost because the Government did not act early enough, despite receiving warning after warning that Scotland’s NHS is in crisis. If the Audit Scotland report is not a wake-up call for the First Minister and her Government, surely those deaths must be.

The First Minister

I know that Douglas Ross probably scripted that contribution before he came into the chamber, but anybody who is listening will hear me taking very seriously the Audit Scotland report, the challenge that it poses and the challenges that our NHS faces, which are in common with challenges that health services across the world face. People can go and read the report for themselves; they do not have to take my word or Douglas Ross’s word for what it says. However, people will also have heard me set out that the report recognises the work that the Scottish Government is doing. The report rightly questions the detail of that work and says that our ambitions are “challenging” and will take time to deliver. As it always does, the Scottish Government will pay very close attention to the recommendations that the report makes.

I take all the comments about accident and emergency seriously. Of course, the NHS is and has been on an emergency footing. It would have been unthinkable for it not to have been on an emergency footing, given that we have faced the emergency and crisis of a global pandemic. The consequences of that for our NHS and for people who are waiting for care has been severe, and I recognise that. However, if we look at A and E on its own, there are absolutely big challenges for us to confront, but our A and E units are still the best performing anywhere in the United Kingdom and have been for six years in a row. We have invested in staffing in our accident and emergency units and redesigned them to ensure that only those who need emergency care access it in that way, so they get quicker treatment. I do not shy away from the challenges. Recovery of our health service is a massive challenge for us and Governments everywhere, but we are addressing it with resources, support and the absolute focus that people have every right to expect from us.

“NHS in Scotland 2021”

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. Today’s Audit Scotland report, “NHS in Scotland 2021” paints a devastating picture of the state of Scotland’s NHS. It details out-of-control waiting times that are “ever-increasing”, a workforce that is burnt out and burdened by stress and strain—with 61 per cent of nurses saying that they are thinking of leaving their job because they are undervalued—and a system that is financially unsustainable. The impact on patients could be devastating. As the report says,

“health conditions will go undetected for longer, leading to potentially worse outcomes for people.”

After 15 years in power, how did it come to this?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Anas Sarwar is possibly the only person who has not noticed that we have been in a global pandemic for the past two years. I think that people across the country understand the reasons for the pressures that Scotland’s national health service is facing, that England’s, Wales’s and Northern Ireland’s national health services are facing, and that health services across the world are facing.

I take those pressures seriously. The Audit Scotland report has a lot of positive things to say about how the Scottish Government and the national health service responded to the pandemic and how they prepared for this very challenging winter. It recognises the steps that we are taking to put the NHS on that path to sustainability, but it also poses serious and challenging questions for us, as it has every right, and the responsibility, to do.

Anas Sarwar wants to look back over the past 15 years at the NHS, and I am more than happy to do that. For example, if we look at funding of our national health service, we see that, since this Government took office in 2007, funding for the health portfolio has increased by over 90 per cent. Front-line health spending is 3.6 per cent higher per head in Scotland than in England—that is more than £100 per head, as I reckoned earlier on. If we total that up, it is equivalent to £600 million, or 14,000 nurses.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister wants to pretend that these problems have all been created by Covid, but that is not true. Scotland’s NHS was in crisis before Covid hit, and that is why we are struggling to recover.

Here is a reminder of what was happening before Covid. The Audit Scotland report on the NHS in 2017 recorded

“a 99 per cent increase in the number of people waiting over 12 weeks”

for an appointment. The Audit Scotland report for 2018 said that NHS Scotland’s “performance continued to decline”. The report for 2019 said that Scotland’s NHS was “financially unsustainable”.

Year after year, there have been the worst reports in the history of devolution. How many more devastating reports does the First Minister need before she acts in the interests of patients and staff?

The First Minister

I do not pretend that all of the challenges that our NHS or other health services face are down to Covid. The health service has been facing demographic pressures. It has faced the pressure of a decade of Tory austerity, which actually started under the last Labour Government, in case we forget that point.

On what was happening before Covid, our waiting times improvement plan was making progress—it was reducing the longest waits in our national health service.

Anas Sarwar wants to pretend that Covid has not had a very significant impact, and he somehow wants to pretend that these challenges are unique to Scotland’s national health service. These challenges are being faced everywhere, across the world. This Government is investing more than many other Governments in its health service. We are doing a range of different things to support our health service, and we will continue to do exactly that, for the sake of those who work on the front line but also for the patients who rely on its services.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister’s response is, frankly, nonsense. There are 680,000 people on an NHS waiting list—that is one in eight of the population.

That number was 450,000 before the pandemic. The NHS is 1,000 beds short; the First Minister cut beds before the pandemic. It is 3,500 night nurses and midwives short; the First Minister cut training places for nurses and midwives before the pandemic.

Staff and patients are crying out for help, and the First Minister responds with empty rhetoric rather than practical action. This Government has been solely responsible for Scotland’s NHS for 15 years. The result is staff who are burned out and wanting to leave, and patients who are being failed and are languishing on waiting lists. This Scottish National Party Government has put Scotland’s NHS at risk. How can it now be the one to save it?

The First Minister

People in Scotland make those verdicts and decide who they trust to steward our national health service through difficult times and on to the path to recovery.

Let me take the two issues that Anas Sarwar has raised. The first is bed numbers. We do have to reflect on the bed numbers that we will need as we come out of the Covid pandemic and face the likely challenges that Covid will present over the years to come, as it, I hope, becomes endemic.

Anas Sarwar is saying, from a sedentary position, that we have cut bed numbers, but bed numbers have been reducing in Scotland and in countries across the world for many years, because of advances in treatment. Many people who used to go into hospital for things such as cataracts now get those treatments on a day-case basis.

Let me remind Anas Sarwar—he can go and check this, as can anybody—that under the last Labour-Liberal Administration in this Parliament bed numbers fell every single year, reflecting that situation. Andy Kerr, who used to be health secretary, used to stand here and make the same argument that I have just made about advances in treatment and technology. Of course, looking ahead we need to address that.

Then look at staffing—look at nurses, for example. I do not underestimate the challenge that our nursing profession works under, but in Scotland we have 8.4 qualified nurses and midwives per 1,000 of population compared with just six in England—that is a 40 per cent higher staffing level of nurses and midwives.

Are there challenges in our national health service that we have to confront and support it through? Absolutely, but we are providing the investment, the support and the focus and determination. That is the trust that the people of Scotland have put in this Government, and we will get on with that job.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I will now take supplementary questions.

Renewables Developments (Transmission Charges)

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

The First Minister will be aware of the serious impact that exorbitant and unfair transmission charges are having on renewables developments across Scotland. Those charges are particularly punitive for the islands, where developers face higher costs than anywhere else in the United Kingdom to connect to the national grid. What can the Scottish Government do to lobby the United Kingdom Government to reform a system that penalises the very places where the renewables potential is greatest?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Transmission networks’ use of system charges remains a really significant barrier to achieving net zero in Scotland. Indeed, analysis by the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets suggests that by 2040 Scottish renewable and low-carbon generators will be the only ones to pay a wider charge, with all others including gas generators elsewhere in Great Britain, being paid credits. Therefore, it is vital that we move towards identifying and progressing solutions as quickly as possible. A fundamentally new approach is needed and we will continue to raise that with Ofgem and the UK Government, as we have been doing repeatedly—we will continue to push for a fairer solution that recognises the massive renewables capability of Scotland.

Teachers (Abuse)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The Press and Journal

this week reported a survey showing that nearly half of teachers in Aberdeen are considering quitting after being subjected to “high levels” of physical and verbal abuse. According to the survey, “rarely a day” goes by without assaults or abuse aimed at members of staff. Aberdeen City Council reports a “collaborative and co-operative approach” between it and the unions, but the issue will be nationwide. What is the Government doing, proactively, to stem such appalling abuse of our dedicated and hard-working teachers?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, there are increasing numbers of teachers in our schools, thanks to investment provided by this Government. We will continue to support the wellbeing and safety of our teachers, working with local authorities—which are, of course, the employers—to do that. Frankly, all of us, regardless of political differences, should unite to say that any abuse or attacks on teachers or anybody else working in our public sector are completely unacceptable. We should all show complete zero tolerance towards that.

Student Poverty

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Figures released this week by the National Union

of Students Scotland show that one in three students are considering dropping out of college or university, one in four were unable to pay their bills in full as a result of financial pressure, and as many as 20 per cent of students from widening access backgrounds were dependent on food banks. Does the First Minister agree that urgent action is needed to address the surge in student poverty here in Scotland, starting with extending the recently announced £150 fuel payment to all students directly? Scotland’s young people cannot afford any more excuses from the Government.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, I agree that we need to take seriously the financial pressures that students are living under in these very difficult times for many people across the country, and we will do that. We have provided support to students in a range of ways and we will reflect very carefully on the case being made by the NUS at this time. I am proud of the fact that students in Scotland do not have to pay tuition fees. One of the most important things that this Government has done—in the face of opposition at various times from the Conservatives, Labour and others—is to protect that vital principle of free education in Scotland, and we will always do so.

West Lothian Valneva facility

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The announcement this week of an investment of £20 million from Scottish Enterprise for the Valneva facility in West Lothian is great news for jobs in the region. Although the company has not yet achieved final approvals for a Covid vaccine, does the First Minister recognise its potential for management of the pandemic globally?

As the United Kingdom Government previously cancelled its order, does she acknowledge the hard work and determination of the Scottish management of Valneva in helping secure a major European Union vaccine contract, and the contributions of my West Lothian colleagues, Hannah Bardell MP and Angela Constance MSP, in working with minister Ivan McKee to secure that welcome £20 million investment?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I strongly agree with all those points. Valneva’s decision to develop and manufacture its Covid vaccine here is extremely welcome, and I pay tribute to the local management for all their efforts. Valneva is a valued contributor to our life sciences sector, and the Livingston facility is a really important asset, developing and manufacturing vaccines for the prevention and treatment of many infectious diseases and supporting high-quality jobs.

The funding package will create employment and drive further research, and I hope that it will underpin Valneva’s operations here in Scotland. I want to take this time to recognise the hard work of all those involved for securing that additional investment as vaccine developments take place over the months and years to come.

I take the opportunity to pay tribute to Fiona Hyslop, Angela Constance and Hannah Bardell, who have fought very hard on behalf of that company, and I wish it every success for the future.

Sexual Harassment In Schools

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Almost two thirds of pupils in Scottish schools have experienced sexual harassment at, or on their way home from, school. Highlighting guidance around sexual harassment does not go far enough when some pupils are unaware of what is considered sexual harassment. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that young people can identify sexual harassment when it happens?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We should come together to make it clear that

harassment or abuse of any form, whether in the workplace, in schools, in the home or in society generally, is completely reprehensible and unacceptable. It is the conduct and behaviour of perpetrators that need to change if we are to end the culture of harassment and abuse.

We want all children and young people to learn tolerance, respect, equality and good citizenship to address and prevent prejudice as well as develop healthy relationships. The gender-based violence working group will consider that report in detail at future meetings. We also provide funding to Rape Crisis Scotland to help deliver its secondary school programmes that aim to tackle sexual harassment and violence.

Covid-19 Protection (Immunocompromised People)

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

An immunocompromised constituent recently got in touch to say that she has had very little antibody response to the Covid vaccination and is choosing to continue to shield. Consequently, she has not seen her family or friends since the start of the pandemic and has become unemployed, which negatively impacts her mental health.

It is not fair that, as life begins to return to normal for many of us, those who are immunocompromised, like my constituent, are forced to choose to continue to isolate. What can the First Minister say to my constituent and to people like her? Has the Scottish Government considered the introduction of antibody therapies for pre-exposure prophylaxis, such as AstraZeneca’s Evusheld, to protect immunocompromised people from the effects of Covid-19?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I will write to the member or ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to write to her, with more detail of what I am about to say, because I will say it only in summary now.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation advises further boosters for people who are immunosuppressed or immunocompromised, which might be helpful in this case.

I set out in my statement earlier in the week some of the new developments around treatment and the work that the Scottish Government is doing to ensure that those treatments get to people who need them most. Treatments have already been delivered to people who need hospital care, and they are now being delivered to people who do not need hospital care but might be at risk of it. New oral therapies are being trialled and I am sure that the point about antibodies is an important part of that process.

My last point is one that I sought to make on Tuesday in my statement. We cannot, and should not, tolerate a situation in which the majority of us can get back to normal but a minority feel that they need to continue to shield. That is why I say to people that, as we get back to normal, we have to show collective responsibility and solidarity. Those of us who might be frustrated with the situation might choose, for example, still to wear face coverings to make it more possible for those who are most vulnerable to get back to normal, too.

We must not allow the creation of a two-tier society as we recover from Covid. However, that requires all of us to take responsibility and to make sacrifices, and I hope that everybody across the country will take that seriously.

Climate Change Committee Report

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The United Kingdom Climate Change Committee has today called for a “presumption against exploration” in relation to new oil and gas, making the case that renewables investment is the “best way” to tackle the energy price crisis.

I am proud of Scotland’s progress on renewables. Will the First Minister press the UK Government to end its policy of maximum economic recovery and to start listening to the climate science?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

That is an important question. I have made clear the Scottish Government’s position on maximum economic recovery. We must make sure that we face up to the tough decisions as we progress towards net zero.

The Climate Change Committee report that has been published today is well worth a read for everyone. It does not quite go as far as to say that there should be no further exploration, but Mark Ruskell summarises it reasonably fairly when he talks about a “presumption”. It also says that it is wrong to say that new exploration will have a meaningful impact on energy costs for consumers.

All Governments have to take this issue seriously, but the powers lie with the UK Government, so we will continue to make our arguments very strongly.

Cabinet (Meetings)

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

3. To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. (S6F-00832)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Tuesday.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am grateful for that reply.

The aggression that has been demonstrated by the Russian regime in recent days asks us, once again, searching questions about our energy security. Fifteen years ago, Alex Salmond thundered that Scotland would become the “Saudi Arabia of renewables”. A few weeks ago, the First Minister boasted of a “truly historic” opportunity for renewables jobs. Now, the new owner of the Burntisland Fabrications site, InfraStrata plc, has secured work, but cannot find Scottish workers. There are not enough trained workers among the colossal wind farms of the Forth estuary to build even eight turbine jackets. Instead, the new owner has had to recruit dozens of workers from abroad, because the Scottish National Party has failed to train enough skilled workers here. Not only are most of the wind farms being built in the far east, but the work that we have won is not being built by workers from Scotland. Does that not show that the SNP’s renewables policy is all wind and no jobs?

The First Minister

I do not agree with that, but there are important issues are the heart of the question. Alex Cole-Hamilton has described the challenge, and my Government is getting on with offering the solutions. I have been frank in the past: I do not think that we have done well enough in securing the economic supply chain and jobs benefits of our massive renewables opportunities, and I am absolutely certain that we must do much better in the future.

A substantial body of work is under way to ensure that, as we take advantage of the opportunities of ScotWind, we build the economic advantages to go along with it. I am determined that we will get that right. There are global shortages of some of the skills that we are talking about, which is a problem, and there are recruitment challenges that are, of course, exacerbated by Brexit. We are focused on ensuring that, as we take advantage of the amazing opportunities, particularly of offshore wind, this and future generations will see the benefits in jobs and economic activity. I certainly look forward to keeping members updated on that in the months and years to come.

School Assault Allegations (Scottish Borders Council)

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the report by Andrew Webster QC into the handling by Scottish Borders Council of school assault allegations, in particular those relating to the abuse of vulnerable children in the Tweeddale support unit. (S6F-00842)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The findings of the report are deeply concerning. First and foremost, my thoughts are with the children and families that have been affected. All children have the right to be cared for and protected from harm and to grow up in a safe environment in which their rights are respected and their needs are met.

Every local authority is expected to have in place appropriate child protection policies and procedures and effective processes to ensure that concerns about the safety and protection of children are identified and dealt with. The Scottish Government remains ready to work with Scottish Borders Council to assist it in addressing any concerns that are raised by the inquiry.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

The QC described the actions of the council as “reprehensible”. The parents’ voices were ignored for four years. There was an internal inquiry and the parents were told that it was done and dusted—nothing to see here, please move on. They had to press for a successful criminal prosecution and for the independent inquiry, which took four years.

I asked the parents what they wanted to ask the Scottish Government. This is it: will the First Minister consider making it mandatory that, when children are in the care of a local authority and issues of child protection arise, investigations are not in-house, because there is more than a whiff of a cover-up in this case?

Given the fact that, during those four years, many of the relevant officers have retired or been employed elsewhere—one has even promoted to chief executive of another council—disciplinary proceedings are irrelevant and, in fact, redundant. Will the Scottish Government therefore consider exploring extending the principle of corporate crime to councils and their officials?

The First Minister

Given the seriousness of the issue, I want to say very clearly, through Christine Grahame, to the parents involved that I will, of course, consider any representations that are made to me.

Although I will not pre-empt consideration of the two specific issues that Christine Grahame has raised, I assure her that we will take them seriously and look closely at them. I am happy to communicate with parents through Christine Grahame as that consideration develops.

Learning from such cases is a vital part of an effective and improving child protection system. That, of course, includes looking at how the criminal law might operate. Alongside Education Scotland, the Scottish Government will seek to work with Scottish Borders Council on actions to address the inquiry’s recommendations, and to consider any learning that can be applied at the national level.

I will look at any further changes, such as those just outlined by Christine Grahame, that could further strengthen our child protection systems and make sure that parents and everyone who needs it has confidence in those arrangements. Few things in our society can be more important than that.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I am concerned about the role of the General Teaching Council for Scotland in child protection. When I asked the GTCS how many child protection concerns had been referred to it, I was told that it did not know, and it would be too expensive to find out. It says that it is not in the front line of child protection but, according to Scottish Government policy, everyone has a job in the safeguarding of children. Does the First Minister think that it is right that the regulator for teacher conduct is not in the front line of child protection?

The First Minister

I am happy to look at the issue because it is important, and I will come back to Willie Rennie when I have the opportunity to do so.

In principle, however, I believe that all of us in Government, local government, and Government agencies, as well as all of us as individual citizens, have an obligation and responsibility around child protection and we should consider that we are all in the front line of that, to a greater or lesser extent. The GTCS obviously has particular responsibilities.

I will consider the comments that Willie Rennie has attributed to the GTCS in the chamber today, and any difficulties with getting information out of the GTCS, and I will then be happy to come back with more detail when I have the chance to do so.

Scottish Crofting Commission

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

5. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the recent report on the Scottish Crofting Commission. (S6F-00816)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Crofting Commission and the Scottish Government will reflect on the findings of the Public Audit Committee’s report, and consider what further actions might need to be taken on its findings and recommendations.

Action is already under way to address issues through an extensive improvement plan. To date, 28 actions out of a total of 41 recommendations that were made in the audit report undertaken by Deloitte have been implemented or are in the process of being implemented.

Officials will continue to monitor the actions laid out in the commission’s improvement plan to ensure that improvements are achieved and maintained.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

The report is damning and says that the Crofting Commission and the Scottish Government have failed to act on concerns that were raised in 2016. The SNP is in a state of paralysis on crofting reform. It failed to introduce a bill in the previous parliamentary session, and it dropped crofting law reform from last year’s programme for government.

Crofting has the potential to make a great contribution to rural Scotland, but the First Minister’s continued inaction is blocking reform and deterring new entrants. Why is the First Minister letting down Scotland’s crofters?

The First Minister

Not surprisingly, I do not agree with that characterisation, but I do agree about the importance of crofting to local communities and the overall landscape and economy of Scotland. These are important issues and we will continue to take forward crofting reforms as appropriate.

The rural affairs secretary has regular meetings with the Crofting Commission to discuss progress of the implementation of its actions and wider issues. We will continue to make sure that the Crofting Commission delivers on the actions in its improvement plan, and we will also take forward appropriate reforms so that crofters and crofting continue to have the important place in Scotland that they have had for a long time.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The Crofting Commission and other similar organisations that have had negative audit reports have cited interference by the Scottish Government. Boards need to be clear about their duties and responsibilities, and the Scottish Government needs to respect their role. Will the First Minister urgently carry out a review of the governance structures of the Crofting Commission and other similar bodies to ensure that they are fit for purpose?

The First Minister

Rarely a day goes by in this chamber—including today—when the Scottish Government is not called on to intervene and take action in relation to agencies or organisations that operate at arm’s length. When we do, we often face the accusation that we are interfering. We continue to try to get that balance right in the interests of the people we serve.

I said in my initial answer that we will reflect carefully on the Public Audit Committee’s report and consider what further action we need to take. It is, of course, important that organisations such as the Crofting Commission understand their roles and responsibilities, including in relation to the Scottish Government. We will reflect on the matter carefully, but we will also continue to support the Crofting Commission to implement the actions that are in its improvement plan.

Social Care Provision

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on the reported view from Common Weal that action is needed to address weaknesses in social care provision due to it being in a critical state, not fit for purpose, underfunded, rationed, fragmented, centralised and risk averse. (S6F-00815)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I agree that action is needed, which is why we are taking forward the establishment of a national care service. That will help to end the postcode lottery of adult care in this country. A key aspect of that will be ensuring that it is designed with service users, so that the barriers to care that they too often face are taken down.

At this point, it would probably be helpful to quote Derek Feeley, who undertook the review of adult social care. He said:

“We won’t achieve the potential of social care support in Scotland without a new delivery system. We need a National Care Service to achieve the consistency that people deserve, to drive national improvements where they are required, to ensure strategic integration with the National Health Service, to set national standards, terms and conditions, and to bring national oversight and accountability to a vital part of Scotland’s social fabric.”

That is what we are seeking to achieve.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am grateful to the First Minister for that answer. Although, as legislation is introduced, there will undoubtedly be a debate about what kind of national care service we will have

, there are immediate problems that need to be addressed.

Will the First Minister agree to look at the inequality in the care workforce? In effect, we have a two-tier workforce. The majority of carers are women, and their pay and terms and conditions depend on whether they are employed in the public sector or in the private independent sector. Unless that is addressed now, we will not be able to fix the social care problems that are escalating out of control. Will the First Minister agree to look immediately at the issue of the unfair and unequal treatment of care workers in Scotland?

The First Minister

We are taking a range of immediate and short-term actions. For example, we are putting more investment into social care and taking action to increase the pay and improve the conditions of the social care workforce. I recognise that there are different employers involved, which leads to apparent inequities and injustices. One of the objectives of the national care service is to deliver national terms and conditions, but through, for example, the national living wage and our fair work practices, we are seeking to address such issues not just in social care but across the economy.

We will continue to take short-term actions while we build a new system that is fit for the future. I hope and believe that there will be a rigorous and robust debate in the Parliament about the detail of that. I really welcome that, but the Parliament has an opportunity to make a generational change in how we deliver social care across our country.

The Presiding Officer

I call Michelle Thomson.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

I apologise, Presiding Officer—I had a supplementary to an earlier question.

The Presiding Officer

Thank you. In that case, I call Finlay Carson.

Curling

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Will the First Minister join me in congratulating and recognising the remarkable achievements of Eve Muirhead and her team GB women’s curling rink in their historic victory in winning the gold medal at the winter Olympics in Beijing, and Bruce Mouat, who, alongside his team GB colleagues, won silver? Their success will now inspire many young men and women to take up what I believe is Scotland’s real national sport, which was first played here 500 years ago.

Will she also applaud the role of small community curling clubs and facilities such as the Dumfries, Stranraer, and Perth curling rinks, and many others across Scotland, which provide opportunity for players of all ages with a wide range of abilities and disabilities to take up the sport, and will she thank the Royal Caledonian Curling Club and British Curling, which not only nurture the sport at grass-roots level but create a world-class training environment for curling to thrive in? [

Applause

.]

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I am tempted just to say yes to all of that and to sit down, which I am sure is what the member would prefer, but I will elaborate a little. I agree with all those points about the communities in Scotland who support curling, and about the work of British Curling, Scottish Curling and all who have contributed to the success that has been enjoyed over the past few days.

I begin by congratulating team Mouat, the men’s team, for their amazing achievement. That was a really tense match. They just missed out on gold, but they should be really proud of themselves. They did themselves, all of Scotland and team GB proud.

It gives me great pleasure to take the opportunity to say a massive congratulations to Eve Muirhead and to all of team Muirhead for winning an Olympic gold medal. There is no doubt that all of the team deserve our congratulations, but Eve Muirhead is well on her way to becoming one of the true global greats of her sport; in fact, I think that she is already there.

Congratulations to all of them. In what are really tough times, they gave us all something to smile about over the weekend, and we are grateful to all of them for that. [

Applause

.]

Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

I raise the case of my constituent Anne Sinclair, who, last October, after waiting seven months for diagnostic procedures, was told that she has an aggressive form of endometrial cancer, for which she is still awaiting treatment, due to the omicron wave.

The First Minister will be aware of the importance of early diagnosis in the successful treatment of cancer. Does she agree that Mrs Sinclair’s situation is not good enough? What assurance can she give to my other constituents who are waiting for a cancer diagnosis that they will not be left in a similar position?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, from what the member has said, I absolutely agree that Mrs Sinclair’s situation does not sound at all acceptable. Through the member, I pass my thoughts to her at what I am sure is an incredibly difficult time.

We have sought to prioritise cancer care throughout the pandemic, recognising the importance of early diagnosis and early access to treatment. Plans are already being implemented to further speed up diagnosis and to ensure that treatment is swift and of high quality, but we want to make sure—and have a responsibility to make sure—that that is the experience of every patient who is suffering through cancer diagnosis.

I will not go too much further into the specific circumstances of Mrs Sinclair’s case, because it is not possible for me to do so. However, if the member will write to me with the detail, I will ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to look into that in particular, and to come back to him as soon as possible.

Peterhead Prison Museum

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The old prison at Peterhead was turned into a visitor attraction in 2016. After spending time there—as a visitor, not a resident—I say that it is an excellent day out. The museum is struggling financially, due to the pandemic, and I believe that it has written to the First Minister, pleading for financial assistance. Will she commit to providing financial assistance to save Peterhead Prison Museum from closure?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, I am sure that I speak on behalf of all members when I say that we are all delighted that Douglas Lumsden was there only as a visitor. [

Interruption

.] Christine Grahame is saying that we only have his word for that, but I am sure that there is objective evidence as well.

It is a serious matter. Visitor attractions across the country have suffered greatly because of Covid, and we are seeking to help them recover. As I am sure the member will appreciate, I am not able today to give a commitment to financial assistance for Peterhead Prison Museum in particular, but I undertake to look in detail at the matter and to consider whether we can do more—or, perhaps more appropriately, whether the local council can be encouraged to do more—to support it.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a brief pause before members’ business.

Torness Nuclear Power Station

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-02776, in the name of Craig Hoy, on the decommissioning of Torness nuclear power station. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now, please.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes that the decision has been taken to bring forward the decommissioning date of Torness Nuclear Power Station from 2030 to 2028; further notes EDF Energy’s assessment that the station is one of the most productive in its fleet of nuclear power stations; recognises that, since the station first started generating electricity in 1988, EDF Energy reports that the plant has produced nearly 280 TWh of zero-carbon electricity, which is understood to be sufficient to power every home in Scotland for 28 years; understands that Torness employs around 500 staff and 250 contractors, with a salary bill of around £40 million annually, which, it considers, boosts the Dunbar and East Lothian economy; notes that Hunterston B power station, in North Ayrshire, has recently shut down for the last time, after what it considers to have been 46 years of reliable energy generation and job creation, and further notes calls urging the Scottish Government to review its decision to use the Scottish planning system to block the development of any future civilian nuclear energy projects in order that nuclear power continues to play a central part in the provision of zero-carbon electricity in Scotland.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I welcome colleagues from across the Parliament and across the country to the debate. Although the motion centres on the future of Torness nuclear power station in Dunbar, the benefits of Torness are felt right across Scotland and beyond.

Torness started operating in 1988 and EDF Energy has recognised it as one of the most productive power stations in its fleet. Since it started generating safe and clean power, Torness has produced nearly 280TWh of zero-carbon electricity. That is enough to power every home in Scotland for 28 years. The station has provided many stable high-skilled and high-paid jobs since construction began in 1980, and today Torness is one of East Lothian’s largest employers, with 500 staff, 250 contractors and a salary bill that totals £40 million per year. That is £40 million—and more, through supply-chain jobs—that benefits families and the local and national economies.

Torness has also provided much-needed apprenticeships in an area where too many young people must travel outwith the region for training or skilled careers. Take the five new EDF apprentices, who started last September: they will learn basic engineering skills in their first year, before specialising in their trade in the second year. They will also get opportunities to gain life skills as part of the apprenticeship programme, before completing the final two years back in Dunbar. That is just one of the many positive benefits that Torness power station brings to the South Scotland region.

As members will know, Torness is set to be decommissioned in 2028—two years ahead of the original schedule. The decision to bring forward decommissioning is the result of analysis of other sites, which provided EDF with a clearer picture of lifetime expectations as the station ages. The station is operating normally and safely, but it is coming towards the end of its natural operational lifespan. I thank EDF for the undertaking that, wherever possible, early and advanced employee engagement will provide career development and reskilling opportunities for the people who work at Torness.

There will be no hard cliff edge of job losses in 2028, although redundancies and redeployment are still likely to lie ahead. As happened at Hunterston B, jobs will taper off as the defuelling process takes place, before EDF hands over to Magnox Ltd to manage the full decommissioning process.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Does Craig Hoy agree that, although the jobs in Torness will be safe beyond the closure date, the chance for future apprenticeships and the skills that young people could have learned will be lost, because new apprenticeships will not be available after the closure?

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

There is a significant opportunity cost as the nuclear industry leaves the region that I represent.

The opportunity for future skilled jobs will be undermined by the closure of Torness and the wider removal of the nuclear energy sector from Scotland. As Mr Whitfield said, East Lothian residents will also lose the opportunity to get skilled jobs in the nuclear energy sector. If Paul McLennan speaks in the debate, I am sure that he will rightly ask, “What about renewables?” That is what Friends of the Earth asked in a briefing, yesterday. However, why cannot we have a future that includes both nuclear and renewable energy? That future would make East Lothian the jewel in Scotland’s energy crown, by offering skilled and renewable energy jobs now and into the future.

I accept that the eventual closure of the reactors at Torness is inevitable, but I do not accept that the end of the nuclear energy sector in Scotland is inevitable. I do not accept that the loss of the clean and stable energy supply that nuclear power provides is inevitable. I do not accept that loss of the skilled jobs in the sector is inevitable. I do not accept that the loss of the economic benefits that nuclear energy brings to East Lothian and Scotland is inevitable. That is all the direct result of the SNP’s and Green Party’s irrational hostility towards nuclear energy. The coalition of chaos have got it wrong—and they have not even done the modelling to assess the economic impact of their actions.

If we want to meet and exceed Scotland’s net-zero ambitions, nuclear power must have a role to play. I welcome the fact that East Lothian is now at the forefront of a significant renewables push, but renewables alone will not meet our requirements for stable and affordable energy supplies through the transition period. The Scottish Government is driving North Sea oil and gas into the ground, so it is madness to turn our backs on nuclear energy at the same time.

Energy is reserved, but the planning system is not. The Scottish Government is using the planning system to scrap nuclear power by the back door. In doing so, it is setting itself on a mission to fail to meet its target of net-zero emissions by 2045. I have yet to hear a well-reasoned argument for Scotland rejecting nuclear energy.

Let us be in no doubt—the SNP Government’s opposition to nuclear energy is playground politics at its worst. It is more about playing to the prejudices of the Greens than it is about achieving a safe, secure, sustainable and affordable energy supply. The opposition of the SNP and the Greens to nuclear power is the politics of the student union.

The SNP has mistakenly conflated its misplaced attitude to nuclear energy with its misplaced attitude to nuclear defence—the tired old mantras, “Ban Trident” and “Bairns not bombs”, are now influencing its views on energy. For reasons that are known only to itself, the SNP Government has sought to demonise the word “nuclear”, despite the safety and security that nuclear power provides to Scotland and the UK. Today, of all days, where would we be if the SNP and the Greens had their way on energy—or, indeed, defence policy?

The Scottish Government should reverse its short-sighted opposition to nuclear energy. My party will stand up for the nuclear energy industry. We will stand up for the jobs of the people who work at Torness and for the contribution that Torness makes to the local economy. I hope that fellow members, including the member for East Lothian and his SNP colleagues, will rethink their position. I hope that they will stand up for local jobs, promote sustainable energy and drop their opposition to next-generation nuclear energy in Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Before I call the next member, I remind all members who wish to speak in the debate that they need to press their request-to-speak buttons. I am not looking at anyone in particular.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I thank Craig Hoy for bringing the debate to Parliament. I agree with much of what he said. I will touch on points that I do not disagree with.

Torness has been one of the most productive stations in EDF’s nuclear fleet and it has contributed to the local economy. There is no doubt about that.

I visited Torness after I was elected in May, and I visited it previously when I was the leader of East Lothian Council. I have also had two meetings with the previous and new station managers. I know many people who have worked at the station and people who work there now. I commend Torness’s contribution to electricity generation and to the local economy.

Now, we need to ask what the best solution is for electricity generation and for contributing to net zero and employability. Renewables—mostly wind power—produced the equivalent of 98.6 per cent of Scotland’s electricity consumption in 2020.

The Scottish Government will bring forward an updated energy strategy in the spring—I am sure that the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport will touch on that. It will be no surprise to hear that the strategy will not include a change in position on nuclear power. That has been made clear by the cabinet secretary and the First Minister. The strategy will come alongside a just transition plan.

I am aware of the increasing interest in the development of new nuclear technologies—for example, small modular reactors, which have been mentioned in the chamber before. The Scottish Government will, of course, be duty bound to assess new technologies and low-carbon energy solutions, and it will continue to do so based on their safety case, their value for consumers and their contribution to Scotland’s low-carbon economy and energy future.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am encouraged, because I think that I have just heard Paul McLennan say that there is a possibility that he and his party will support deployment of small modular reactors. Does he agree that, on this day of all days, it is wrong to continue with the demonisation of “nuclear” as a word and of nuclear power as a source of clean energy?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I do not agree that I said that I would support SMRs. That is not what I said. I said that the Scottish Government is duty bound to assess them. I think that the cabinet secretary and the First Minister have said that, as well. They remain doubtful, but they will look at the matter, and are duty bound to do so.

In 2016, Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant received a contract for difference strike price of £92.50 per megawatt hour, which has increased by some 25 per cent since then. In January this year, the project was pushed back by another six months, and its estimated cost has increased by another £500 million. Recent power price spikes underline the need to create better outcomes from energy investments, particularly for people who are struggling with household finances.

Analysis has identified that, in 2030 alone, Hinkley could add almost £40 a year to consumers’ bills, whereas equivalent offshore wind could reduce them by £8. Significant growth in renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture is the best way to secure Scotland’s future energy needs and meet our net zero objectives.

We heard at First Minister’s question time that the United Kingdom Climate Change Committee has recommended that renewables-based energy is the best way of reducing exposure to volatile price rises. That was announced today.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I might be pre-empting Paul McLennan, but he has not mentioned jobs yet. Has he grasped, yet, that it is the job of members of Parliament to come to Parliament and defend jobs in their constituencies and not to throw them under a bus?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Of course I have. I will come on to that.

The recent ScotWind leasing announcement about 17 new projects is, of course, extremely welcome. A total of just under £700 million will be paid by successful applicants in option fees, to be passed to the Scottish Government for public spending.

There will also be multibillion-pound supply chain investment in Scotland—I will touch on that later. The power that will potentially be generated will provide for expanding electrification of the Scottish economy, as we move to net zero. Of course, once the leasing agreements are officially signed, the details of the supply chain commitments by the applicants, as part of their supply chain development statements, will be published. I have already met the Scottish Offshore Wind Energy Council and Scottish Renewables on the issues. I will touch on that matter again.

The recent Scottish Renewables statement, “Scotland’s Offshore Wind Sector: Supply Chain Impact 2020”, revealed that wind-energy capacity could increase by 231 per cent in the next eight years. The report also found that the sector could triple in size by 2030. The sector already employs 23,000 people. The long-established offshore wind and hydro power industries were worth £2.4 billion and £915 million respectively in 2019.

What can we do locally? On 18 March I will convene a meeting of energy companies to look at the future of employment in the sector in East Lothian. The meeting will focus on skills and labour, supply chain development, manufacturing opportunities and community benefits. The following organisations, all of which I have met individually, will attend the meeting on 18 March: Inch Cape Offshore, Seagreen Wind Energy—which includes SSE and TotalEnergies—EDF Renewables, Scottish Power, EDF Energy nuclear, the Scottish Gas Network, Community Windpower, Viridor, Skills Development Scotland, the Department for Work and Pensions, Scottish Enterprise, East Lothian Council, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh College, Scottish Engineering, Scottish Renewables, the Scottish Government and Unite the union. .

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr McLennan, I have been generous. I know that you have taken interventions, but other members need to speak.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I have taken a few interventions.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I know, but time is moving on. I have given you some latitude because of that. Please now bring your remarks to a close.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

A series of meetings will look at the opportunities that renewables will bring directly to East Lothian.

Every worker who wished to stay with EDF at Hunterston remained with the company.

In conclusion, I say that the position on renewables offers East Lothian many opportunities. It offers opportunities in increased employment, supply-side development, manufacturing and community benefits. As the East Lothian constituency MSP, I am clear that the transition needs to be managed well and that it requires constant engagement with all. We are already doing that, and we will continue to do so.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I thank Craig Hoy for this debate, which allows members who have hosted nuclear energy facilities in their regions to participate. That applies not only to East Lothian but to my West of Scotland region and the Hunterston B power station.

We should be honest in saying that Hunterston B was not entirely uncontroversial in its origin, but over the years it has grown to be a great source of both debate and pride—in equal measure—for the people of North Ayrshire. Whatever our personal or political views, it has undoubtedly led the charge in delivering reliable, low-carbon and cost-effective power to homes across Scotland and beyond.

The plant first opened in 1976 and has provided 46 years of energy generation and hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs directly and indirectly, as well as important apprenticeships. We owe every worker there a huge debt of gratitude. They and their families were welcome and have become part of the fabric of the community and of society in my region.

At its peak, the power station could provide enough energy to power 1.7 million homes. Over its lifespan, Hunterston B has saved 224 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions when compared to emissions from traditional, carbon-based methods of energy creation.

Members will know that cracks in the reactor began to appear in recent years, which rightly caused concern. I was the first to hold regular meetings and calls with civic agencies, the plant, its owners and local community interest groups that had concerns. The plant’s doors have now closed and the de-fuelling process will commence, at which point it will be handed to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

Although we are losing that facility, there is exciting potential on the horizon, on which I will focus my brief comments. North Ayrshire Council, along with partners from the University of Glasgow and the private sector and others, is currently bidding to host the UK’s first nuclear fusion facility, in Ardeer, near Ardrossan, through the UK spherical tokamak for energy production programme. That is a bid that I will support, and I hope that members in my own and other parties will support it, too.

I am sure that we all received briefings before the debate that slightly downplayed the importance of modern nuclear technology in our efforts to move towards net zero. I respect other people’s views on that, but what makes the Ardeer bid so different is that it will operate by using nuclear fusion rather than nuclear fission. That is the key.

Fission creates energy by splitting nuclei into smaller particles; fusion does exactly the opposite. Hundreds of millions of tiny reactions every second can provide a massive amount of energy by using very small amounts of fuel. That sounds technical, but it is important. Fusion is efficient, it is safer and cleaner—and it is cheaper. One kg of fusion fuel could provide the same amount of energy as 10 million kg of fossil fuel.

Let us think about that for a second. By 2050, the world will be using twice as much electricity as it does today. As populations grow and living standards rise, the amount of energy that we use rises. We must ask ourselves a simple question: how on earth will we provide for those energy needs?

Current events in Ukraine remind us of the fragility of the supply of gas in particular. Prices were on the rise, and I have no doubt that they will rise further. Members extol sanctions for energy companies in one debate in this Parliament but then bemoan the energy crisis and the cost of living in another. That is all very well—both arguments are viable, but viable solutions must also be found.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Will the member take an intervention?

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I am short on time. I apologise—I wish I had more time.

I am not advocating nuclear power as the only source of energy. No one doubts the importance of renewables in Scotland. Renewable energy is one of our environment’s great assets, but the reality is that we are simply not there yet. Renewables alone cannot and will not fulfil all our energy needs. They may provide our electricity in the future, but not our gas. We still need it and we still use it, so we either extract it or buy it.

There is a lack of interest and enthusiasm from SNP members, not only in North Ayrshire but across Scotland. There is a lack of a strategy for creating so-called green jobs on the ground. Where are the jobs that will replace those at Hunterston? I want to cement Scotland’s reputation as being at the forefront of scientific excellence. Let us make progress towards net zero and rejuvenating our economy.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Greene, please bring your remarks to a close.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

Let us secure our energy supply. First and foremost, let us not look back on this as a missed opportunity. I ask the cabinet secretary to listen to our requests.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank Craig Hoy for bringing to the chamber this members’ business debate on such an important issue for East Lothian and South Scotland, and for energy provision across Scotland.

As we heard, the building of Torness began in 1980, and it first started generating power only eight years later, in 1988. It has been one of the most productive plants in the fleet, generating enough zero-carbon electricity—the zero carbon for which we are all now striving—to power every house in Scotland for 28 years.

However, Torness is now working beyond its original expected 25 to 30-year design life. The design is from the 1970s—it is like going on holiday and hoping that you do not get an old-fashioned Boeing 747 that has been riveted together. Its continued operation is a tribute not only to the 550 EDF staff on site, plus the 180 full-time additional staff, but to the skills and knowledge of those who are in charge at EDF and those above who enforce the regulations for our civil nuclear fleet.

Electricity production at Torness will end in 2028, following inspection, modelling and operational experience gained from across the United Kingdom and further afield. The decisions that are being taken are based on evidence and knowledge, and are founded on the requirement for safety.

Jamie Greene, in his tribute to Hunterston B, referred to the information that was learned during that cycle of the fleet. Safety lies at the heart of the nuclear power industry, and it has done from day 1. That is why to conflate the use of nuclear power in the production of electricity—safe, zero-carbon electricity—with that of nuclear weapons is to do a disservice to a highly skilled industry.

Talking of the skills in the industry, I congratulate Lisa Hilferty, who, at 26, was named the station’s apprentice of the year last year, after four years of skilled training. Murray Gilvray, Connel McNeill, Thomas Summerfield and Paige Gould all qualified as apprentices along with Lisa, and they are now able to take those skills and their trade around the world.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I will, if it is short.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I thank the member for giving way, as I know that he does not have much time.

The problem is what will replace those apprenticeships. If the Government’s policy is no to nuclear per se, it must have something else to offer those young people, and at present a replacement simply does not exist.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Absolutely—that is why I took the opportunity to pay tribute to those apprentices, who have been through a highly skilled course, with placements around the whole UK. They have not been supported by the apprenticeship fund because they travelled to England for part of their training. Nevertheless, the apprenticeship scheme shows EDF’s commitment to young people and to moving forward.

The closure of Torness will mean a shortfall in capacity, and that gap has to be filled. In part, in all probability, it will be filled by gas from the global open market, from places such as Russia. That will prevent more ambitious emissions reductions, which will threaten the energy security of Scotland and the UK in the future.

I know that time is short, but I quickly pay tribute to those in the Civil Nuclear Constabulary, who have protected our nuclear fleet in some of the worst conditions that the weather can throw at them. They do so to keep us, our plants and the fleet safe but—most important—to retain energy security in the UK.

Nuclear power needs to play a part in our zero-carbon future.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I rise to make a small contribution regarding the final part of Craig Hoy’s motion, in which he calls on the Scottish Government to review its blocking of any future civilian nuclear energy projects in Scotland.

Last week, Maree Todd set out the Scottish Government’s position in the

John O’Groat Journal

. She rejected nuclear power as, she said, it has a “high cost” to consumers over other options; it is “high risk” in terms of safety; and it is not “sustainable”. She said:

“We must focus on reliable energy sources that ... align with our net-zero ambitions ... I believe that the renewables plan, as set out in the Scottish Energy Strategy, offers just that.”

Not unusually, Maree Todd’s arguments, when they are stress tested, lack foundation. She is apparently unaware that the Scottish Government confirmed to me earlier this month that it has no strategic plan to transition from Scottish-generated nuclear energy to renewables. I do not know how she knows that nuclear does not

“align with our net zero ambitions”.

That is extraordinary, given that the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport told me that,

“it is not currently possible to distinguish between types of generation or fuels”—[

Written Answers

, 21 January 2022; S6W-05511.]

in order to break down CO2

emissions data from energy generation sources in Scotland.

As Craig Hoy flagged, the Scottish Government will not replace Torness and Hunterston, but has done no modelling of the impact on energy bills and the cost of living crisis, so Maree Todd’s cost claims are spurious at best.

Maree Todd justified her position by stating:

“I believe the vast majority of the public back my position.”

I respectfully suggest that she reviews some YouGov research that was published in the run-up to the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—which shows that, in Scotland, 65 per cent are in favour of a role for nuclear in the energy mix, 13 per cent are against and 20 per cent do not know.

Maree Todd also said that nuclear was “high risk” in terms of safety, but there have been no major nuclear safety incidents in the UK industry’s 46 years. Anyone who has done their homework knows that all current operating stations have extraordinary levels of built-in redundancy and that new reactors are designed with even higher levels of safety built in, with further enhancements being made as the technology moves on, all while being subject to one of the most robust regulatory regimes in the world.

I turn to the economics of nuclear over other options. The price of power from Hunterston B until it was retired and from Torness is about £45 per MWh. Wind contracts for difference historically average around £90 to £100 per MWh and have only recently reduced to levels similar to those of Torness. In terms of build cost, the UK Government’s proposed regulated asset base model will lower the cost of financing. As Paul McLennan will be delighted to hear, the National Audit Office says that that would have reduced Hinkley’s costs by 40 per cent. In addition, wind turbines operate only 25 to 40 per cent of the time. Without nuclear power, when wind turbines are not operating, the grid would have to use expensive gas to fill the void. Nuclear stations operate more than 90 per cent of the time, which means that they require far less back-up.

On waste, members should bear in mind the fact that the nuclear industry is the only one to pay for and clean up its own waste. EDF and the UK Government have already set aside £14.8 billion to decommission the existing power stations and dispose of waste from them. An increasing fund, equivalent to about £2 per MWh, has been created to cover the cost. The amount of waste that is produced by nuclear is also very small. Almost all the radioactivity is found a tiny fraction of the waste, which is called high-level waste. Over the lifetime of a station, there is one dishwasher tablet-worth of such waste for every person in the UK.

That was a short contribution to the debate, but one that was necessary, if only to add some scientific and data-driven fortitude to a Scottish Government position that is anything but scientific and data driven.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Members have illustrated the challenge that Scotland faces with energy in future. With Scotland having used more nuclear power than any other UK nation in 2020—26 per cent of its electricity generation was from nuclear—the forthcoming end of generation at Torness and the cessation this year of generation at Hunterston B present a significant challenge to the resilience of Scotland’s electricity grid.

According to the Climate Change Committee, the country will need four times as much clean power by 2050 to hit net zero and 38 per cent of that clean power will need to be from firm, reliable, always-on power sources regardless of weather conditions, so we are faced with a stark choice: reliance on gas or the utilisation of new-generation nuclear stations. Whether in Scotland or other parts of the United Kingdom, it is as simple as that.

We are presented with a choice. That choice is not simply the non sequitur presented by other members, such as Hinkley Point C. I am not a fan of the European pressurised water reactor technology. It is a dog of a design and deeply problematic. It is a symptom of the domination of the British nuclear industry by the French state. Other opportunities are presented to us not only to consider new technologies but to build an industrial renaissance in Scotland by being at the forefront of the energy industry.

In 1933, the father of nuclear physics, Sir Ernest Rutherford, said:

“Energy produced by ... breaking down ... the atom is a very poor kind of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine ... We hope in the next few years to get some idea of what these atoms are, how they are made, and the way they are worked.”

That statement by Rutherford illustrates how great minds can fail to anticipate the evolutionary direction of their own discoveries. Like all scientific discoveries, the conversion of matter into energy can be used for good or ill, and it is for us to make the right choices.

New types of nuclear reactors have significant potential to counter the three principal threats to public acceptance of nuclear power generation by improving safety, reducing waste and reducing cost. That opens up the prospect of their making an important contribution to any future emissions reduction strategy, and Scotland should support the development of such nuclear power technology.

Nuclear generation has a very small CO2

footprint, but most existing nuclear plants are not suitable for coping with variations in grid demand and cannot contribute to restarting the system after a grid failure, because the presence of the grid is required as a prerequisite for the reactor to start up. As a result, we should seek to design nuclear plants that are more commercially competitive, reliable and flexible and which exploit inherently passive safety features that can contribute very significantly to capital cost reduction. Such ambitions might seem like a tall order, but new fourth-generation reactor technology should be able to deliver such a vision.

For example, designs for molten salt reactors are showing great promise in a number of countries, and they have the potential to achieve large cost savings by removing the hazards that could lead to the explosive release of dangerous fission products into the atmosphere. In the hierarchy of approaches to safety engineering, hazard elimination, harm reduction and managing the likelihood or mitigation of consequences of the hazard itself normally prove to be the most cost-effective strategy, and that is where technologies such as molten salt come into their own.

Other favourable features of molten salt reactors include the elimination of salt and steel corrosion problems through chemical-reducing properties in the coolant formulation and the ability to carry out refuelling on load and unpressurised, further reducing capital costs. Moreover, the maintenance of long-lived radioactive waste is much easier and cheaper, because radioactive waste with a fairly long half-life is converted into much shorter half-life isotopes. A range of fuel types can also be used; for example, thorium fuel has the potential to be used when uranium reserves begin to run out, and the UK legacy stock of plutonium can be used for new fuel production. Indeed, the reuse of plutonium as fuel would have immense strategic value in removing or reducing the proliferation of potential weapons material. Finally, molten salt reactors can also be produced as road-transportable modules.

We have the potential to utilise such new technologies to build a supply chain in Scotland that can crowd in wealth and opportunity. If the nuclear industry had not evolved from military imperatives and had developed independently, the molten salt technology that is now under development would probably be regarded as a dream contribution to the challenges of reliability and carbon reduction in the electricity system. That is the opportunity that we could have if we fundamentally reassessed what nuclear energy could present the country with, and I urge the cabinet secretary to broaden his horizons and consider these emerging fourth-generation technologies. Scotland could be leading on this globally, and we should seize that opportunity.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I congratulate Craig Hoy on securing time for this important debate on Torness, which is an important facility for Scotland. It has provided power for more than 30 years and will continue to do so for the next couple. I recognise the valuable role that the workforce has played over many decades and, indeed, the important role that the facility itself plays in the East Lothian community. Indeed, those very points were highlighted by Craig Hoy, Paul McLennan and Martin Whitfield.

A timeframe has been set for the facility to come offline and move into the decommissioning phase, and as a key part of that, Scottish Government agencies will work in partnership with the National Decommissioning Authority to see what support and assistance can be provided to the workforce as the facility transitions away from being a nuclear power station to other opportunities. Of course, with the facility planning to come offline in 2028, we need to consider whether Scotland’s electricity supply will remain secure with that loss of output. That is why National Grid conducted a detailed study into the effects of the earlier decision to end production at Torness.

The study from National Grid, which is responsible for ensuring security of supply, says that, as a result of the closure of that facility, Scotland’s system remains secure, with some mitigations needing to be put in place, a key part of which is to increase our own capacity.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I ask the member to let me make a bit of progress first.

Our energy sector has been in transition for some time now. We are very clear as a Government that our priorities are renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture and storage. We believe that they provide the best pathway to Scotland reaching its net zero target by 2045, and we have been making very good progress in taking that forward over recent years, particularly with the expansion of renewable capacity. We now have the equivalent of around 98 per cent of our electricity coming from renewable sources, and we want to build on that and develop it further as we progress.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I am not entirely convinced by some of the statistics that we have just heard. However, going back to the point about National Grid, does the cabinet secretary not recognise that all of National Grid’s future energy scenarios include nuclear?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

In relation to the UK, yes, they do, but not here in Scotland in terms of security of supply, which is what the study specifically addressed. [

Interruption

.]

I hear Mr Kerr questioning—from a sedentary position, as ever—details of these matters. In relation to the 98 per cent, where exactly does he think that that figure comes from? It comes from the assessment through National Grid. Let me give some of the details. Scotland is currently a net electricity exporter. In 2020, Scotland exported 20.4TWh of electricity, which is the equivalent of powering every household in Scotland for 26 months. Scotland imported a little over 1TWh, and the net export of electricity from Scotland was 19.3TWh in 2020 alone, which was a record high level. That is a reflection of the investment that has been made in our renewable energy sector, and that is why it is a priority for us going forward.

We are very fortunate as a country to be in a position where we have such extensive potential to develop our renewables sector. It is important that we build on that and make progress, because it will help to decarbonise not only Scotland but the UK and beyond.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

For clarity, and to address the point that Maree Todd made, does the cabinet secretary believe that nuclear power, and particularly the station at Torness, is safe?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Yes, I do accept that it is a safe facility, and there is a very strict regime around that. However, I think that it is wrong to try to give the impression that there is no risk associated with nuclear power. The events at Fukushima took place in 2011, which is not that long ago. [

Interruption

.] We need to be mindful of the risks that are also associated with it. It is not risk free, but it is a very safe—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Excuse me, cabinet secretary. Will you resume your seat for a second? Far too much is being said from a sedentary position. Mr Hoy, you intervened on the cabinet secretary and he gave you an answer, but you continued to speak from a sedentary position. That is not the way to do it. You should seek another intervention or listen to what the cabinet secretary says. Thank you.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I hope that I have answered the member’s point.

Let me also point to the outcome of the first phase of ScotWind. The approach that Crown Estate Scotland has taken has demonstrated an ambition from the sector to deliver some 25GW of offshore wind across Scottish waters. That is testament to its confidence in the approach that the Scottish Government is taking in investing in and supporting our renewables sector, and we are making sure that we also secure the jobs and other benefits that can come from that.

I turn to the point about the cost impact of the nuclear sector. Even if we set aside the waste and the environmental concerns, nuclear power is well recognised as representing poor value for customers. It is an expensive form of electricity to produce. The evidence that was provided by the contract that the UK Government awarded for Hinkley Point C, which Paul McLennan mentioned, is that the price for generating is £92.50 per megawatt hour.

Compare that with electricity generated from offshore wind: that is currently at £39.65 per megawatt hour.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

T

he assessment is that, under the UK’s forward look at future generation, the costs as a result of Hinkley Point are potentially £40 for each household bill in 2030, in addition to the costs resulting from that programme alone, whereas the equivalent for offshore wind would be £8 less per year. [

Interruption

.]

I will give way to Mr Kerr, who can now stand on his feet and ask a question.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am very pleased to take this opportunity to stand on my feet and ask a question.

Paul McLennan raised the prospect that, with his responsibility for energy, the cabinet secretary would consider with an open mind the possibility of small modular reactors. Some of the issues that he has been discussing are addressed through the deployment of small modular reactors. We have heard some excellent speeches on the engineering and science behind it all. There is a real potential benefit in SMR. Will the cabinet secretary consider that with an open mind as a benefit for Scotland?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The reality is that, although small modular reactors represent a change in construction type, the technology is the same, by and large, on a smaller scale. As we have set out in our energy strategy, under existing technologies, we do not support new nuclear energy provision. That is the difference. Although there is a change in terms of scale and in the nature of its construction, in terms of the principle of the nuclear process, it remains the same, and it is not a new technology in that sense.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Would the cabinet secretary accept that, as I outlined in my speech, the transformational effects of such technologies as molten salt can introduce passive safety, so it is actually a revolutionary change in how the nuclear industry would operate, massively reducing the capital cost of stations? Even for the supply chain, Rolls-Royce is interested in building a heavy pressure vessel factory in the UK, with £200 million of investment. The cabinet secretary’s colleague the member for Glasgow Provan says that he has not even met representatives of the company to discuss the prospects of that factory being located in Scotland. That is a supply chain opportunity for heavy engineering and advanced manufacturing. Would the cabinet secretary at least consider taking that up proactively with Rolls-Royce?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I am sure that Ivan McKee will respond to the particular point about pursuing anything with Rolls-Royce through inward investment but, given the position of the Scottish Government regarding the existing available technologies for fission nuclear energy, that is not consistent with our energy policy, and that will not change under the review of our existing energy strategy. That includes the small reactors to which the member has referred.

Liam Kerr made an interesting point in relation to the costs associated with decommissioning nuclear energy. He referred to the significant amount of money that EDF has set aside to cover nuclear decommissioning. Who does he think has provided that money? It is us—customers. We have provided that money through our bills. The cost of decommissioning is not something that is picked up by the companies under some philanthropic approach; it is based into the costs and is added on to our bills as a result. To try and give the impression that decommissioning is something that is picked up by the commercial companies alone is factually incorrect; it is met by the additional costs that are put on to customers’ bills. That is why it is a poor deal for the taxpayer. Even Hunterston A, for example, which stopped producing electricity back in 1990, is still going through its decommissioning process, and the cost of that is fixed into people’s household bills. That is why the costs of nuclear energy are well recognised as not being good value for customers.

That is why the Scottish Government’s focus is on investing in renewable energy, making the best use of Scotland’s natural assets and doing so in a way that is consistent with Scotland reaching net zero by 2045.

13:39 Meeting suspended.

14:30 On resuming—

Education and Skills

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon. I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place and that face coverings should be worn while moving around the chamber and the wider Holyrood campus.

The next item of business is portfolio questions, and this afternoon’s portfolio is education and skills. As ever, if a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button or place an R in the chat function during the relevant question. Again, as ever, I would appreciate succinct questions and answers, to allow us to get through all the questions.

Teaching Assistants (Recruitment)

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support expanded recruitment of teaching assistants. (S6O-00772)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Since the start of the pandemic, we have provided £240 million of additional investment, specifically for the recruitment of more education staff, including classroom assistants. In addition to that funding, we are providing local authorities with permanent funding of £145.5 million per year to support the recruitment of extra teachers and support staff on permanent contracts.

Since 2019-20, we have also invested an additional £45 million in pupil support assistants for additional support for learning, and we will continue to provide extra support to local authorities by investing an additional £60 million over the next four years to support that.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Over the course of the pandemic, many pupils from lower income backgrounds, especially in areas of high multiple deprivation, were disproportionately impacted by the requirement to learn at home. Reasons for that greater impact range from cramped environments for studying to having fewer studying resources available at home. What resources is the Scottish Government providing to local councils to allow them to provide more teachers and teaching assistants? How will that benefit pupils who live in areas of multiple deprivation?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

In my original answer, I mentioned the £240 million that has been provided since the start of the pandemic. That has allowed local authorities to recruit additional teachers and school support staff and maintain them in the system. For example, there are now more than 2,000 more teachers in Scotland’s schools than there were before the start of the pandemic in 2019. As I am sure Mr Kidd is aware, the Government was elected on a manifesto commitment to support the recruitment of 3,500 additional teachers and 500 support staff over this parliamentary session. That will mean a significant injection of resources, which will bring much-needed resilience into the system.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Can the cabinet secretary explain why her Government has cut the total marketing spend on teacher recruitment? In response to a freedom of information request, her Government revealed that, between 2017-18 and 2020-21, there was a cut of £163,000 in funding. Should the Government not use every tool possible to recruit the teachers?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We absolutely should use every tool available and do so as effectively as possible. Of course, every year, we analyse not just the marketing material that goes out but our ability to use different channels. Social media and digital communication are exceptionally important and remain a main part of the campaign as we continue to provide for marketing for recruitment of new teachers.

Teaching Unions

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

2. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with the teaching unions. (S6O-00773)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Scottish Government meets the teaching unions frequently through the offices of the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers, and has regular meetings with the teaching unions to discuss a range of issues relating to education, including through the Covid-19 education recovery group and the Scottish education council. I also meet the teaching unions biannually to discuss a range of topics.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

Last October, the Educational Institute of Scotland estimated that as many as one in 10 teachers in Scotland were on short-term contracts. The teaching profession is absolutely vital to this country and our recovery from Covid, and that is no way to treat it. The cabinet secretary has been asked several times exactly how many teachers are on those short-term contracts and what her Government intends to do about it, but she has been unable to tell us. Is she any wiser today?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Figures are published on the number of teachers who are on permanent and on temporary contracts. I mentioned them in my answer to Bill Kidd and, for the sake of time, I will not again go into the details of our commitment to provide resources to local authorities to ensure that teachers are being recruited on permanent contracts. That is exactly why we baselined that £145.5 million—to ensure that we see more permanent teachers and more support staff in our schools. The Government has taken action and will continue to take action to ensure that teachers are recruited and to encourage them to be put on permanent contracts. I would also make the point that recruitment and retention is a matter for local authorities.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

How are university students being supported in their learning and degree progress, in light of on-going strike action?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We absolutely take that issue exceptionally seriously. I understand that the Minister for Higher Education and Further Education, Youth Employment and Training set out in a letter to the member that universities are autonomous institutions, and therefore staff pay and conditions are matters for universities to determine. Although ministers have no locus to intervene in such issues, I would expect universities to make every effort to minimise disruption for students, particularly in what is yet another difficult year for our university and college students.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The Educational Institute of Scotland has joined parents in opposing the creation of one super headteacher post to cover nine schools in Largo and the east neuk of Fife. In response to parent outrage, Fife Council has delayed that decision but has not ruled it out. From the cabinet secretary’s position of leading education across the country, what advice does she give the council about that proposal for a super headteacher?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Willie Rennie and his party are very keen to encourage Government not to step on the toes of local authorities. Local authorities have responsibility for recruitment and retention issues in relation to all teachers, including headteachers. However, I recognise that there has been major concern in the area about that issue, and I recognise the strength of feeling of parents on it. As with all issues that concern government, whether local or national, we would of course expect all elected members to respond carefully when there is that level of concern. The decision is for Fife Council, but I am sure that it has heard very clearly—as have I—the concern from parents in the area. If the council is to make changes in that area, it must absolutely ensure that it justifies them and takes parents with it on that journey.

Curriculum for Excellence

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

3. To ask the Scottish Government how curriculum for excellence meets the needs of colleges and industries in providing appropriate learning to young people to allow them to progress to the next stage of their training. (S6O-00774)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The curriculum for excellence helps our children and young people gain the knowledge, skills and attributes that are needed for life in the 21st century. It enables strong school-college and school-employer partnerships and has stimulated an expansion of vocational opportunities, which ensure that our learners are prepared to progress to the next stage of their journey, whether that be further learning, training or employment.

The learner destination statistics that were published this week show that the proportion of 2020-21 school leavers in a positive initial destination was 95.5 per cent, which is up from both 2018-19 and 2019-20 figures. We are committed to continuous improvement, and our response to the review of the curriculum for excellence by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development that was published last summer will help ensure that.

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

I recently visited Perth College of the University of the Highlands and Islands, and was blown away by the range of services and courses that it offers students and the wider community. However, one issue that was raised with me was the apparent lack of parity of esteem between vocational and academic pathways. Can the minister say what Government can do to strengthen the links between colleges and schools so that vocational opportunities are given the same level of support as academic ones?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I was very pleased to visit Perth College last year, and I was equally impressed.

I am conscious of the issue that Mr Fairlie has raised in relation to parity of esteem. I think that we are in a better place than we were previously due to the range of developing the young workforce services that we have in place. There is evidence of a year-on-year increase in the number of school leavers who have attained vocational qualifications at Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 5 and above since 2014. In 2013-14, 7.3 per cent of students achieved that but, by 2020-21, 26.1 per cent of school leavers were achieving it. That has happened on the basis of strong and effective school-college partnerships. Of course, there is more to do and our developing the young workforce activity will continue to take forward that journey of ensuring greater parity of esteem.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

A key consideration set out by the curriculum for excellence is that it maximises opportunities for learning and creates clear links to future skills opportunities. However, the Audit Scotland report has highlighted how little progress has been made on skills alignment due to the lack of leadership and oversight by the Scottish Government. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the lack of progress on skills alignment is a major obstacle to maximising opportunities for learning?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I have literally just read out the figures on the significant progress that we have made on the creation of qualifications at school level. I take the leadership role that I have, and that the Scottish Government has, in relation to the alignment journey very seriously. That is why I engage regularly with the Scottish Funding Council and Skills Development Scotland to make sure that the matter is a focus of concerted activity.

We continue to take forward that programme through a range of means. Just recently, we set up a shared outcomes assurance group in Government that will involve both organisations operating to a framework, the details of which will be available soon. Just as the Auditor General suggested, we will reflect some of the findings in his report in the new letter of governance to the agencies, emphasising once again the importance of skills alignment.

Children and Young People (Mental and Emotional Wellbeing)

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what action is being taken in schools to promote the mental and emotional wellbeing of children and young people. (S6O-00775)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We continue to prioritise support for mental health and wellbeing in schools. The mental health in schools working group recently developed a whole school approach framework to assist in supporting children and young people’s mental health in schools. That complements earlier work to provide a professional learning resource for school staff to support the wellbeing of children and young people. We also continue to support our local authority partners with £16 million in funding to ensure that every secondary school has access to counselling services.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

During the pandemic, there has been an increase in the use of social media platforms as our young people have tried to stay connected with one another. Unfortunately, there have been reports that that has meant an increase in the levels of cyberbullying—something that has been raised in the past few weeks and months by a number of my constituents. The cabinet secretary will be aware that I have raised some very harrowing cases in the chamber. What action is the Scottish Government taking specifically to combat cyberbullying and the impact that it has on young people’s mental health?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Fulton MacGregor raises a very important point. I recognise the work that he has been doing on the issue for some time.

Online bullying should not be treated differently from face-to-face bullying and it is addressed effectively when it is part of our whole anti-bullying approach, not as a separate area of work. All of the Scottish Government’s policies include advice on online bullying. There are specific experiences, outcomes and benchmarks in the technologies area of curriculum for excellence that allow an explicit reference to c

yberresilience and internet safety, allowing schools to incorporate learning around those issues.

The Scottish Government also continues to fund respectme, Scotland’s anti-bullying service, whose website contains information and practical advice for children and young people, and, importantly, for parents and carers, on dealing with online bullying.

“Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future”

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what the reasons are for its decision not to publish the draft of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report, “Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future”, that it received in January 2021. (S6O-00776)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The OECD report, “Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future”, is an independent review carried out by an independent and internationally respected body. The timing of its publication was determined by the OECD. The report, which was published in full on 21 June 2021, backed curriculum for excellence, and the Scottish Government has accepted its 12 recommendations as part of our commitment to continuous improvement.

The Scottish Government has not released the draft report, as it is deemed to be subject to a freedom of information exemption. The Scottish Government applied the exemption regarding confidential information obtained from another international organisation in good faith. We consider that to be an entirely valid approach. The OECD’s code of conduct, which it applies to all publications around the world, prohibits the sharing of confidential material, and the draft report was clearly marked confidential.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

That is the stuff of fantasy. Has the cabinet secretary asked the OECD whether it would object to the release of the draft and, more importantly, the Scottish Government’s response to it, which is, as I understand it, the property of the Scottish Government?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I refer Mr Mundell to my original answer on the issue and to the OECD’s code of conduct, which applies to all the publications that we have. The OECD is—[

Interruption

.]

I am afraid that Mr Mundell is not interested in the answer, but I will carry on for the sake of the rest of the chamber, who are interested. The OECD is an internationally renowned organisation and it has given an expert, trusted opinion to the Scottish Government. Fact checking ensures that reports and recommendations reflect the best and the agreed understanding. The UK Government takes the same approach, as has been seen with many reviews and reports in the past.

We will of course continue to take our freedom of information requirements exceptionally seriously, and we did so in this case. I believe that the FOI exemption that I have talked about with regard to international organisations has been the correct decision, and we applied the exemption on that point.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Does the cabinet secretary

agree that grandstanding on important educational issues has no place in the Parliament, and will she join me in thanking the OECD for its independent review of the curriculum for excellence? Does she agree that being open to external challenge is crucial to ensuring that our education system remains world class?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I am happy to repeat my thanks to the OECD for its work, both in the most recent report and in the past. It is important that, as a country, we open ourselves up to scrutiny from internationally renowned and respected organisations such as the OECD. It is imperative that any Government, as part of its continuous improvement drive, invites the OECD to do that work and, importantly, acts on its recommendations, which we continue to do.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

That was not fact checking. The Government wanted a major rewrite. The report was not published before the election because John Swinney did not like its contents.

Communications from the Government to the OECD are owned by the Government, so the education secretary is perfectly entitled to publish them without anyone else’s permission. She cannot hide behind the OECD. Will she just get on and publish?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Rather than discrediting the Government with that question, Mr Rennie discredits the OECD. As I said, it is an internationally renowned organisation and its work in an educational setting is seen to be expert and trusted. The OECD was fully entitled to present its report to the Government to have it fact checked, but the idea that the Scottish Government can somehow manipulate an internationally renowned organisation such as the OECD to change its recommendations is fantasy from Mr Rennie. It absolutely discredits the OECD and the very commendable work that it has done.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Rona Mackay joins us remotely.

Scottish Education Exchange Programme

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

6. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the development of the Scottish education exchange programme. (S6O-00777)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The development of a Scottish education exchange programme is a programme for government commitment and will help maintain Scotland’s place as an outward-looking, internationally connected destination for work and study.

We are engaging with stakeholders from across the education spectrum, including higher and further education, community learning and development, youth work and adult education and schools and sports, and will develop the programme to ensure that it is fit for Scotland.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Stand International is a charitable organisation that is based in Kirkintilloch in my constituency. It regularly took disadvantaged young people on trips abroad under the Erasmus scheme, so sadly lost due to the United Kingdom Government taking us out of Europe. Does the minister agree that, if possible, our own exchange programmes should include young people from all backgrounds, who will benefit enormously from such life-enhancing trips?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

If I recall correctly, I met Stand International along with Rona Mackay and Amy Callaghan MP, and was pleased to do so. I am grateful to the organisation for the work that it undertakes.

I agree with the premise of the question. I believe that the replacement scheme that we take forward should be as encompassing as possible. It should have a particular slant towards supporting people from the most disadvantaged backgrounds in order to ensure that they have access to life-changing opportunities. One of my great regrets is that the Turing scheme has gone in exactly the opposite direction. Rona Mackay and other members have my commitment that, when we design our scheme, it will not follow suit.

Education (Net Zero Targets)

Dean Lockhart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its plans for a flexible skills and education system that can help meet net zero targets, as referred to in its programme for government 2021-22. (S6O-00778)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The Scottish Government is already undertaking significant action to equip individuals with skills and training to meet the needs of a net zero economy. That includes the publication of the climate emergency skills action plan in December 2020, the launch of the green jobs workforce academy in August 2021 and a suite of green skills training projects that have been delivered through the national transition training fund over the past two years.

We are implementing our learning for sustainability action plan and are continuing to engage with young climate activists through the Teach the Future campaign.

Dean Lockhart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The number of green jobs in Scotland is declining. According to figures that were released last week by the Office for National Statistics, the number of jobs in the low carbon and renewable energy economy fell from almost 22,000 in 2019 to just over 20,000 last year.

The minister refers to the green jobs academy but, in giving evidence to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, the Scottish Trades Union Congress highlighted that that is merely a website listing jobs. Will the minister confirm whether the green jobs academy is an academy with teachers providing training and other assets that we normally associate with an academy, or is it merely a website?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

It is certainly more than merely a website. It ensures that we harness the capacity of the system that we have in place through the range of initiatives and measures that I have laid out to be responsive to the great challenge that we have with climate emergency skills. I am pleased to say that, as of 17 February, nearly 5,000 users have accessed the resources that are available via the green jobs workforce academy.

Six months from the academy’s launch, Skills Development Scotland will undertake a detailed impact assessment of it through information from and profiles of the users and sectors that have used it, which will help to inform the development of its next phase. I am sure that Mr Lockhart will take great interest in that.

Scottish Survey of Literacy and Numeracy

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported comments of Glasgow City Council’s new executive director of education regarding reinstating the Scottish survey of literacy and numeracy. (S6O-00779)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We remain committed to teacher professional judgment as the means of assessing progress in the broad general education phase, through the annual achievement of curriculum for excellence levels data. National standardised assessments will continue to have a role to play in supporting that. As we set out in our response to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report last year, we will explore options for a sample survey approach to assessing progress across the four CFE capacities.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Why is it so difficult for the cabinet secretary to reinstate that well-regarded survey? Any government that is serious about restoring educational standards would recognise that collecting and tracking the right data is essential to an evidence-based approach to education. Does the cabinet secretary accept that many parents and teachers will simply draw the conclusion that the Scottish National Party Government would rather hide its failings than make things better for our young people?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

With the greatest respect to Dr Gulhane, he is wrong on this issue. The reason why there have been changes is that a national survey provides us with greater information to ensure that we know what is happening in schools and local authorities. The SSLN—[

Interruption

.] I am afraid that Mr Mundell is, once again, not interested in the answer.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Cabinet secretary, hold on a second. Mr Mundell, you have shouted from a sedentary position on numerous occasions now. I have allowed you to get away with it to date, but that is enough. Please treat the answers with as much respect as the questions.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As I was saying, the SSLN did not provide data about performance at school or local authority level. When the data showed a decline in literacy and numeracy between 2014 and 2015, it was decided, as part of the national improvement framework work, to move to a census-based approach to allow us to monitor progress in literacy and numeracy in order to provide support where it was required at school and local authority level

. That simply was not possible with a survey such as the SSLN.

I note that, in the 2015 OECD report—the OECD is getting quite a few mentions today—it said that the sample approach of the SSLN did not give national agencies enough evidence.

Ports

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Ivan McKee on building industrial clusters around Scotland’s ports. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement so there should be no interruptions or interventions.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Scotland has significant strengths in the industries of the future. In renewable energy and hydrogen, life sciences, financial services and fintech, quantum photonics, advanced manufacturing, digital and space, we have genuinely world-leading technology, underpinned by the excellence of our academic institutions. Although we have had significant success in building clusters of manufacturing excellence around those opportunities, we recognise that we have much more to do. The Government is committed to maximising opportunities across Scotland’s regions, and in doing so, to creating high-paying jobs, delivering on our fair work agenda, ensuring that everyone is paid at least the real living wage, and meeting our ambitious net zero commitments. We will use all the tools that are at our disposal to deliver on those ambitions, including maximising exports and inward investment, building Scotland’s indigenous business and supply chains to scale, leveraging public sector procurement, and supporting businesses with targeted support and investment.

Our vision is of a Scotland that has world-leading capabilities in the industries of the future. Our focus is on high-innovation, high-wage and high-technology opportunities. We are not interested in a race to the bottom in low-cost, low-wage and low-tech manufacturing. Our national strategy for economic transformation will clearly articulate our vision, and we recognise the key role of Scotland’s ports and airports in delivering it.

Today,

I want to update Parliament on the progress that we have made in the implementation of one initiative that will support delivery of this vision—our green ports model—and on how we have managed to secure significant additional investment in Scotland to upgrade port infrastructure and build clusters of manufacturing excellence that are fully aligned with our fair work and net zero commitments, on a partnership basis between the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments.

T

he UK Government has presented its free port model as a dividend of the economic vandalism that is Brexit. We reject that hypothesis. Free ports already exist in many European Union member states, and indeed did so in the UK within the EU, until 2012. We are well aware of the reputation of some free ports globally, while also recognising their value, in other cases, in driving innovation and high-technology economic development.

This afternoon, I will set out our ambitions for and expectations of Scotland’s green port model. I will explain why, after careful consideration, we engaged in intergovernmental dialogue on an equal footing with the UK Government to improve the free port model by introducing a tailored model for Scotland that delivers the Scottish Government’s requirements, addresses concerns and ensures proper safeguards and enforcement measures.

Four principal factors resulted in the recent agreement with the UK Government. First, we negotiated a partnership in which the Scottish Government will have an equal say in decision-making and in delivery. That demonstrates our determination to ensure that the influence of devolved government is strong in collaborative dialogue with UK ministers. That was not on the table previously. Indeed, it is a model that can and should be used in other areas in which the UK has recently been all too willing to ride roughshod over the devolution settlement.

Secondly, we insist that bidders must set out clearly how they will embed fair work practices into how they, and the companies within the area, conduct business. That was not on the table previously. All applicants in Scotland will be familiar with the Scottish Government’s ambitious policies on fair work. Specifically, they will all know about the features set out in the fair work first criteria. Naturally, applicants will want to refer to those criteria, considering how as robust a case as possible for designation can be set out.

We are crystal clear on this. Any bid that does not aim for the very highest standards in fair work practice, including payment of the real living wage, will not be supported by the Scottish Government. Our commitment to fair work is clear, and this programme will be an exemplar of how we will deliver it.

Thirdly, we insisted that applicants be required to set out robust plans on how they will contribute to Scotland’s just transition to a net zero economy. We have been clear about the need for green ports to be an exemplar in the use of technology and innovation to decarbonise Scotland’s economy, to incubate and foster clusters of new green technology and industries and to benefit wider supply chains in Scotland. The UK Government has now agreed to that requirement, which, of course, is all the more pressing in the aftermath of the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow. Previously, that was not on the table.

Last month, ScotWind announced 17 projects. ScotWind will provide us with enough power for every home in Scotland and will create the opportunity for Scotland to build a world-leading offshore wind manufacturing and export sector. As highlighted in the strategic infrastructure assessment for offshore wind that was commissioned by the Scottish Offshore Wind Energy Council, which I co-chair, there needs to be greater collaboration between developers, the supply chain and the public sector to help to focus activity and investment in Scottish ports, and to help Scottish suppliers to grow and win offshore wind work. The green ports policy will support delivery of the crucial objective of securing more offshore wind contracts for Scottish ports.

My use of the word “green” is about more than semantics; it signals clearly to global investors our ambitions and our unique offering, along with our intention of cementing Scotland’s already well-deserved reputation as a leading global environmental, social and governance and net zero investment destination. Anyone who engaged with investors during COP26 will be well aware of the significant opportunities that that presents for Scotland.

Finally, the UK Government has now decided to provide fair funding for Scotland. The agreement to invest up to £52 million to create two new designations means that the same set-up funding will be available for England and Scotland. That was not on the table before. Indeed, that funding is almost three times as generous as the funding package in the Secretary of State for Scotland’s formal offer to me last autumn.

On the four criteria—fair work, net zero, funding and an equal say—the Scottish Government has secured everything that it sought in the negotiations. On that basis, we are content to proceed with the implementation of the green ports model in Scotland.

Operation of the model will include the Scottish Government providing investment support through non-domestic rates and land and buildings transaction tax. In addition, operators can expect a wider package of developmental support from Scotland’s enterprise agencies, local authorities and others.

I have heard the criticism that the Scottish Government delayed discussions, somehow disadvantaging Scotland, but the contrary is true. Any delays were a consequence of the UK Government being slow to come to the table and slow to recognise our specific requirements. Thankfully, that situation was resolved towards the end of last year, which enabled the negotiations to conclude.

I will not shy away from the fact that the reputation of free ports around the world is mixed. Concerns have been expressed about deregulation and the risks of criminality, tax evasion and reductions in workers’ rights. However, that is not a model or an approach to which the Scottish Government would agree. We are optimistic about the potential of the model, but we will remain vigilant and focused on firm monitoring and evaluation of progress on the ground. I have engaged with trade unions and others on the matter to ensure that their concerns are taken into account, and I will continue to do so.

As we will have an equal say in choosing the two designations in Scotland and in how they are governed subsequently, I can assure members that the Scottish Government will remain focused on ensuring that the highest standards of governance and probity are maintained. I also point to my confidence that our ports, local authorities, businesses and others that will submit applications will be similarly focused.

In that element of our partnership work with the UK Government, we will ensure that issues of compliance with the law, governance and management of performance are placed at the top of any hierarchy of priorities. I make it clear that that which is granted can also be recalled.

In addition to the issues that I have already covered, we are conscious of the need to avoid economic displacement within and from Scotland. Bidders will be required to make clear what assessments they have made of potential displacement.

Scotland’s green port model is designed to support the development of innovative industries that are committed to developing new green technologies, supporting fair work opportunities and, crucially, embedding themselves in the local communities in which they are based. Further, we want the areas to assist the development of their regional economies and benefit wider national supply chains.

A full applicant prospectus is scheduled for publication next month. The selected designations will take part in a fair, rigorous, open and transparent process.

We look forward to considering all applications, in the expectation that they will serve to demonstrate the ambition, potential and commitment of the partnerships that assemble them—including local authorities, which are central to the bids that we expect to come forward.

The agreement delivers fair set-up funding for Scotland. It demonstrates the negotiating strength of the Government and the fundamental importance of fair work, payment of the real living wage and net zero to the Scottish Government and to Scotland’s future economy.

I will ensure that the Parliament is kept fully up to date as the matter progresses.

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 need to move to the next item of business. I ask members who wish to ask a question to press their request-to-speak button or type R in the chat function, if they have not yet done so.