Scottish Parliament, 10 March 2022

304 contributions from 69 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good morning. I remind colleagues of Covid-related measures and that face coverings should be worn while moving around the chamber and the wider Holyrood campus.

The first item of business is general question time. As ever, I would appreciate succinct questions, with answers to match.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its plans for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill. (S6O-00846)

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

We remain committed to the incorporation of the UNCRC into Scots law to the maximum extent possible as soon as is practicable.

Although the Supreme Court’s judgment means that the bill cannot receive royal assent in its current form, we are urgently and carefully considering the most effective way forward for the legislation, to ensure that incorporation can happen as quickly as possible and with confidence that amendments to the bill will not attract further challenge.

Our preference is to address the Supreme Court’s judgment by returning the bill to Parliament via the reconsideration stage. In parallel with planning for that, we are also exploring options for extending our powers to incorporate the UNCRC beyond those that are available under the current devolution settlement. The Deputy First Minister issued a copy of his exchange with the Secretary of State for Scotland about that in an update to the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Next Wednesday will mark a year since the UNCRC bill was passed unanimously by the Scottish Parliament. I am concerned about the letter that the minister referred to, because it suggests that, in the reconsideration process, the Government is seeking further powers in order to make the bill competent, rather than working with the United Kingdom Government to make the bill competent within the powers that it currently holds.

Political point scoring over the constitution by the Scottish Government has already delayed the bill, and it seems that it will continue to do so. In the meantime, young people have no idea of the timescale that the Government is working to or of how long the process will take. They need to be reassured that the Government remains committed to their rights and to bringing the bill within the Parliament’s competence as soon as possible, and they deserve to know when incorporation of the UNCRC will be a reality.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

When will the Government bring back the bill?

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

The Deputy First Minister has committed to keeping Parliament and the committee updated on progress with the bill.

It is important to recognise that the majority of the work in relation to incorporation of the UNCRC is continuing at pace.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Stephanie Callaghan, who joins us online, has a brief supplementary.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

The “Make it right” campaign, which is led by the young people of North Lanarkshire, is encouraging other local children to better understand their rights. The young people have even created and starred in their own social media video.

What steps is the Scottish Government taking to involve young people in raising awareness of children’s rights ahead of incorporation of the UNCRC in Scots law?

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

Scottish Government officials are due to meet North Lanarkshire Council later this month to learn more about that excellent project and to discuss how we can share good practice.

The Scottish Government commissioned Young Scot and Children in Scotland to work with children and young people to develop resources to raise awareness of children’s rights across all sectors. In September 2020, materials were published to coincide with the introduction of the UNCRC incorporation bill to Parliament.

Good work is under way in schools. UNICEF UK’s rights respecting school awards provide a framework for embedding the UNCRC strategically and practically in schools, thereby ensuring awareness of children’s rights among children and young people. In addition, the Children’s Parliament has recently launched a complementary resource, “Dignity in School”, which aims to demonstrate ways in which primary schools can adopt a rights-based approach and help to make rights real for children.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

People get fed up when our two Governments cannot just sort things out, especially when it comes to the issue of rights for children.

Last week, we heard about the number of children who are locked up in prison when they should not be, so the matter is real. Rather than hunting for a never-ending battle with the Conservatives, when will the Government sort this out? We need a date.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

As I said in my answer to Pam Duncan-Glancy, the Scottish Government is working at pace on the issue. The Deputy First Minister will write to the relevant committee and inform Parliament.

Co-operative Development

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on co-operative development in Scotland. (S6O-00847)

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

We are committed to working through Co-operative Development Scotland and the enterprise agencies to support the growth of co-operative and other alternative business models, which we know can deliver strong outcomes on fair work and bring benefits to local communities.

The Scottish Government is determined to significantly increase the number of co-operatives, social enterprises and employee-owned businesses in Scotland, while supporting regional regeneration and the wealth of local communities. Our recently published 10-year national strategy for economic transformation sets out our commitment to undertake and publish a review of how best to do that.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

The Scottish Government has stated that its goal is the creation of 500 employee-owned businesses by 2030. In 2018, it set up a Scotland for employee ownership group to achieve that. Co-operatives and employee ownership were mentioned again in last week’s economic strategy.

The problem is this: the co-operative development team in Scottish Enterprise was dismantled and Scottish Enterprise axed the budget for awareness raising about co-operatives. Grant support to cover 30 per cent of the cost of the transaction to convert a business to worker ownership has been withdrawn. The Scotland for employee ownership group has become little more than a ministerial photo opportunity.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please ask a question.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

As a result, Scotland is going not up but down the United Kingdom worker-ownership league table. When will the Scottish Government finally address that, stop paying lip service, put in place a credible industrial strategy, back that with the resources that it needs and show that it really is serious about co-operative development?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

I clarify that Co-operative Development Scotland is the arm of Scottish Enterprise that works in partnership with Highlands and Islands Enterprise and South of Scotland Enterprise to support company growth through collaborative, co-operative and employee ownership. Regarding the number of such businesses, Scotland continues to be ahead of the rest of the UK.

We are focusing on all alternative business models, including social enterprises. The member will be aware that, in the past two years, we have doubled our funding for social enterprises to almost £2 million over three years to support the activity that is happening on that.

Resources are in place and Co-operative Development Scotland continues to work as part of Scottish Enterprise. The Scottish Government remains committed, as we have highlighted in the national economic strategy, to developing co-operatives, social enterprises and other alternative business models in Scotland, because we recognise the value that they bring to communities, to Scotland’s employees and to its economy as a whole.

Ayrshire Economy (Scottish Government Investments)

Willie Coffey (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley)

3. To ask the Scottish Government how its investments have helped the wider Ayrshire economy. (S6O-00848)

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

The transformational £103 million Scottish Government investment in the Ayrshire growth deal supports projects that are identified as having the greatest potential for long-term inclusive growth. Regional partners have estimated that the deal will create 7,000 new jobs across Ayrshire and will unlock an additional £300 million from the private sector.

The projects that are included will transform the regional economy through high-value jobs creation and strong regional supply chains, and through tackling weak productivity and delivering skills across Ayrshire. Ayrshire has also benefited from investment from a range of regeneration programmes that support development and delivery of local solutions to tackle poverty and disadvantage in communities across Ayrshire.

Willie Coffey (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley)

Can the minister confirm that the investments that are being made by the Scottish National Party Government are making a positive impact on the Ayrshire economy, in particular at Prestwick airport, where financial intervention has saved many jobs directly and even more in the wider economy, and will support the potential for thousands more jobs across Ayrshire, in association with the Ayrshire growth deal?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Without our invention in 2013, Prestwick airport would have closed. Hundreds of jobs would have been lost as a result, but were saved by our actions at that time. We were clear that closure would have had a significant impact on the local economy through job losses at the airport and in the other businesses that rely on the airport’s operations.

We will invest £30 million in projects in and around Prestwick airport over the course of the growth deal. Four space and aerospace projects will benefit from that investment. Those projects will deliver significant economic benefit and will play a key role in signalling Prestwick as a major inward investment destination for the international space market. Regional partners have estimated that more than 7,000 new jobs will be created as a result of the deal, with that number expected to include more than 2,700 direct, indirect and construction jobs within the Prestwick hub.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

In a letter to the Scottish Government, the Ayrshire economic joint committee notes that projects in the Ayrshire growth deal have seen an increase in costs since they went to tender. It writes that councils might require contingency funds for some projects, but that budget pressures might make that impossible. What funding will the Scottish Government provide? Will it guarantee that all projects that it is involved in will be fully funded and delivered on time?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Sharon Dowey will be aware that some of the growth deal money has been agreed between the Governments, and that we are working with local partners to direct how the funds will be spent. We are well aware, as the whole economy is, of the on-going cost pressures in construction and other sectors. The Scottish Government procurement team is working hard to do what it can to mitigate them and to provide advice and support, where possible, to partners across the public sector that are facing on-going cost challenges.

Trunk Road Network Safety (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

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

4. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any safety issues on the trunk road network in the Perthshire South and Kinross-shire constituency. (S6O-00849)

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

The trunk road network in Scotland is subject to an annual road safety review based on statistics that are recorded by Police Scotland, and measures are then prioritised where they are expected to contribute to the Scottish Government’s 2030 casualty reduction targets. That process has identified road safety investigations on the A85, the A9 and the M90, which are currently under way. They are considering trends of recorded injury accidents as well as focusing on vulnerable groups such as motorcyclists. Any recommendations for improvement work such as signing, resurfacing and speed management that emerge from that will be considered and prioritised for construction as appropriate.

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

The minister may be aware that there is growing community concern about the planned new junction on the A9 at Shinafoot, east of Auchterarder. Residents have concerns about road safety and speeding issues, the location of the proposed junction and the fact that it appears to have been scaled back from a two-way to a one-way system. Will the minister agree to meet me on site to discuss the concerns with local representatives?

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

I am aware that the Shinafoot junction proposals are intended to support developments that were identified in the Perth and Kinross local development plan and that they address junction issues that would otherwise exist on the A9. The design of any new junction on the A9 would, of course, be subject to a safety audit and other checks.

I recognise that, as Mr Fairlie outlined, concerns have been raised by members of the community that he represents. As I understand it, they relate mainly to local roads access to existing communities and new developments. I will, of course, be more than happy to meet Mr Fairlie and members of the community that he represents on site, because it is essential that we get road safety improvements right for the communities that they serve.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Questions 5 and 6 have been withdrawn.

Offshore Wind and Green Economy Jobs

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to increase the number of jobs in offshore wind and the wider green economy. (S6O-00852)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government is determined to maximise the economic opportunity for the Scottish supply chain from our offshore wind potential. We will drive forward offshore wind skills development, working with stakeholders to focus on the opportunities for diversification and skills transfer from our oil and gas sector, in line with our commitment to a just transition.

The introduction of ScotWind’s supply chain development statements demonstrates how serious the Scottish Government is about holding developers to account if they do not honour their supply chain commitments and create green jobs.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

To make the most of the opportunities in the development of the green economy, we must ensure that our education system produces a skilled workforce with skills that are appropriate for future jobs. We missed that boat with the development of onshore wind, but we now have opportunities with offshore wind, hydrogen, electric power and all the associated servicing skills. What is the Scottish Government doing to embed the green economy in the education system?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

It is not easy to overstate—it really cannot be overstated—what an enormous opportunity ScotWind is. The number 25GW will not mean much to many people, but it is huge. The ScotWind leasing round will provide a strong pipeline of projects through the current decade and beyond. To prepare our workforce for those skills, we have the future skills development plan and the climate emergency skills action plan. It is vital that we equip the people of Scotland—young people who are coming up the way, people who are transitioning from high-carbon industries and people who are returning to work—with the skills that they need.

Our national strategy for economic transformation commits to lifelong learning for all the people of Scotland and the appropriate skills development that we need for the green industrial revolution.

Audrey Nicoll (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen South and North Kincardine)

Given the importance of transitioning from oil and gas to green energy such as offshore wind, this matter is of great importance to businesses and residents in my constituency of Aberdeen South and North Kincardine and in the wider north-east. How is the Scottish Government engaging with north-eastern employers in the energy sector, particularly given that this is Scottish apprenticeship week, to ensure that support is in place to train apprentices and reskill existing employees?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Be as brief as possible, minister.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The north-east has enormous potential not only in offshore wind but in green hydrogen. Looking at the Scottish ports—and in particular at the opportunities in Aberdeen, in that respect—the Scottish Government is completely committed to supporting the north-east through the energy transition, including with skills development.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mercedes Villalba has a very brief supplementary question.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

Previously, the Scottish Government promised to deliver 130,000 green jobs by 2020. However, just a sixth of that number have been delivered. Latest figures reveal that the number of green jobs is falling, with the loss of nearly 3,000 since 2014. Will the Scottish Government support Labour’s call for the £700 million from the ScotWind licensing, and all annual income, to be ring fenced for investment in the creation of green jobs?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Applicants to the ScotWind leasing round were required to submit a supply chain development statement to set out the anticipated level and location of the supply chain impacts, including jobs. Developers can update their statements throughout the developmental phase. The introduction of that statement demonstrates how serious the Scottish Government is about holding developers to account if they do not support their supply chain commitments. We fully expect developers and original equipment manufacturers to engage with the domestic supply chain to create green jobs and to fulfil their commitments.

Economic Growth (Transport)

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government how the country’s transport system can help to improve economic growth. (S6O-00853)

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

Supporting inclusive economic growth is at the heart of the national transport strategy. We have a vision for a sustainable, inclusive, safe and accessible transport system that helps to deliver a healthier, fairer and more prosperous Scotland for communities, businesses and visitors. All our investment in transport aligns with that vision, as we have set out in the second strategic transport projects review. By focusing investment on sustainable transport options and continuing to invest in green innovation, we are making Scotland more accessible for residents, visitors and businesses, and we are supporting Scotland’s workforce.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Last week’s so-called national strategy for economic transformation said of the country’s transport network that

there remain opportunities to improve connections within and between certain areas, and it said that the trunk road network is a crucial facilitator for the national and local delivery of goods. Given that, is the minister now prepared to break free of the shackles of the extremist Greens and commit to properly funding improvements on the A77, A75, A83, A9 and A96?

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

I remind Mr Simpson that, since 2007, the Government has invested approximately £9.5 billion in managing, maintaining and improving Scotland’s trunk road and motorway network. The £3 billion investment to dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness is one of the biggest transport infrastructure projects in Scotland’s history.

I turn to his substantive point on the national strategy for economic transformation. That sets out the priorities for Scotland’s economy as well as the actions that are needed to maximise the opportunities of the next decade to achieve our vision of a wellbeing economy. Scotland’s transport network has been identified as a key driver in helping to achieve the ambitions and the vision that are outlined in the refreshed strategy.

He will also be aware that the recently announced strategic transport projects review 2 is highlighted as a means to improving connectivity and infrastructure, which he touched on. STPR2 is currently out for public consultation until April. A meeting with Mr Simpson next week will be welcome, and perhaps we can discuss some of those matters in more detail.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Fiona Hyslop has a very brief supplementary question.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The minister will be aware of the reopening of the Bathgate to Airdrie line, which has brought great economic and social benefits to my constituency and across central Scotland. Will she identify how many transport projects the Scottish Government has invested in? I am sure that, like me, Graham Simpson will want to welcome them all and the economic contribution that they have made.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Minister, bear in mind that you can write with further detail.

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

Fiona Hyslop is absolutely right to highlight the huge investment that the Scottish National Party Government has made in transport infrastructure. For rail alone, we have invested £1 billion, including £300 million on the Airdrie to Bathgate rail link improvement, which brought three new stations and a 31 per cent increase in the number of passengers at existing stations; and investments in the electrification of all rail routes between Edinburgh and Glasgow—and to Stirling, Alloa and Dunblane.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes general question time. There will be a slight pause before we move to the next item of business.

Energy Security

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It is now two weeks since the Russian war against Ukraine began. Yesterday, the tragic events hit a new low, with a children’s hospital being reduced to rubble. The Russians bombed a hospital and targeted children. Young, innocent lives have been lost in the most despicable and atrocious way. It is hard to express the anger and grief that we all feel at that appalling act.

I had the honour of being in the United Kingdom Parliament on Monday, to hear President Zelensky address the chamber. He spoke then of 50 children already having died in this war. Following yesterday’s bombing, more young lives have been lost because of the actions of Putin and his forces. The people of Ukraine are all in our thoughts and prayers just now.

I know that we all agree that more needs to be done to help refugees who are escaping war, and that needs to happen now. The situation has to be urgently addressed, because those who are fleeing for their lives need safety and security here in the United Kingdom, and we have to do everything that we can to support them.

In the light of Russia’s actions, will the Scottish Government update its energy strategy to outline how it plans to protect our energy security?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

All of us are horrified and deeply distressed by what we are witnessing unfold in Ukraine on not just a daily but an hourly basis. Yesterday’s developments were a new low—a low that I believe that all of us hoped we would never see: the targeting of children and babies in a maternity hospital.

Vladimir Putin is committing, on a daily basis, crimes against international law. He is committing crimes against humanity. He is committing war crimes. It is important to do everything that is possible to stop Vladimir Putin, and it is also important to ensure that he pays the severest price for the actions that he is undertaking and the crimes that he is committing now.

I welcome the limited movements on refugees that we heard this morning from the Home Secretary, but they need to go further. I repeat my appeal to the Prime Minister to emulate the example of the Republic of Ireland and countries across the European Union: to waive visa requirements and put sanctuary first and paperwork second. I intend to write to the Prime Minister later today, to make that call again, and I would welcome the signatures of Douglas Ross, Anas Sarwar and Alex Cole-Hamilton on that letter. I will liaise with their offices later today.

These are important matters. Although refugee entry is a reserved matter, let me be clear that the Scottish Government is actively working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, councils and the Scottish Refugee Council to make sure that we are ready and able to welcome refugees from Ukraine and give them the support that they need.

On the question that Douglas Ross posed, as he knows, the Scottish Government is in the process of updating our energy strategy. That work commenced prior to the horror that is now unfolding in Ukraine, but, of course, the situation in Ukraine has an implication for energy prices. There is not so much of an implication for energy supply in Scotland or the UK, because we are not dependent on Russian oil and gas in the way that many other countries are, particularly in Europe, but we will all bear the burden of increased prices. Obviously, those developments will now be factored into the work on the energy strategy, which will be published when that work is complete.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

All week, I have been working with colleagues in the UK Government to see what more can be done on refugees. I welcome the steps that the Home Secretary took this morning, but I agree that much more needs to be done to protect people who are fleeing for their lives.

The First Minister mentioned the updated energy strategy, but Russia’s appalling actions have put a renewed focus on energy security. In Scotland, we have the natural resources to protect our own supply and the resources to export to other countries, to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas. Last night, a former SNP energy minister said:

“In principle, we do need more oil and gas.”

He continued:

“we need all the oil and gas production we can get”.

I agree with Fergus Ewing—[

Interruption

.] Patrick Harvie laughs, but we can protect Scottish jobs and secure our energy supply.

First Minister, surely, now is the time to maximise oil and gas production in Scotland, using the energy on our own doorstep.

The First Minister

These are important issues. In light of what is happening in Ukraine, we have to look carefully at all the issues. As I said, the work on our energy strategy is under way, and it will allow us to properly understand our energy requirements as we make the transition to net zero.

I think that around 80 per cent of North Sea production is already exported—a fact that it is important to bear in mind. We need to consider very carefully the implications for us of the current volatility in the energy market. I repeat: for the UK, this is not an issue of security of supply. Only around 3 per cent of our gas supplies and around 8 per cent of our oil and petroleum supplies come from Russia, but we will all bear the burden of global price increases for energy, and, indeed, for food, which are driving inflation and the cost of living.

It is important that we understand the realities here. Even if we were to put to one side the environmental considerations—which none of us should do, because the climate crisis has not gone away—given the timescales and practicalities involved, it is not credible to suggest that the short-term solution to the crisis lies in increasing North Sea production. Existing fields in the North Sea are not currently operating under capacity. Expanding existing fields is possible, but that would take months, if not years. New fields take years, if not decades, to plan and develop. We should not go after solutions that might sound superficially attractive but whose practicalities and realities do not stand up to scrutiny.

In the short term, what we must see, in response to rises in global prices, is substantial and significant action from the Chancellor to shield households across the UK from that impact, including, as suggested from a sedentary position behind me, action on reducing VAT.

In the medium to longer term, as I have heard UK ministers and the European Commission say in recent days, the action that the world needs to take to reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels is exactly the same action that the world needs to take to address the climate emergency. We must accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels to renewable and low-carbon energy, and that is what the Scottish Government remains focused on.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister started her answer by saying that she and her Government would look at all the issues and all the options, but she refused to say whether she agrees with me and the Scottish Conservatives that we have to maximise oil and gas production in Scotland at the moment to help with the current crisis and the crisis going forward.

The First Minister has said previously that no new oil fields should be developed. That is just not a realistic solution. It will simply lead to more imports from other countries. Right now, we purchase £3 billion of oil and gas every year from other countries, including Russia. If the First Minister is not prepared to move on domestic oil and gas supply, what are her alternatives? Scottish Conservatives support the increased use of nuclear energy. It is low carbon and it is safe. Should not nuclear be in Scotland’s energy mix, if we want to stop relying on Russian oil and gas and move to net zero?

The First Minister

If Douglas Ross had listened, as I am sure that he did, he would know that I am trying to explain the practicalities in the short term.

He quoted my colleague at me, which is perfectly legitimate. Let me quote one of his colleagues at him. On Sunday past, the UK Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Kwasi Kwarteng, said:

“For as long as we depend on oil and gas—wherever it is from—we are all vulnerable to Putin’s malign influence on global markets.”

That is true, that is the reality, and if Douglas Ross’s colleagues recognise that, perhaps he should as well.

Douglas Ross is right to ask what our solutions are. All of us are grappling with what the right, best and deliverable solutions are. In the short term, given rising prices, it is inescapable that we need to see a substantial financial intervention from the chancellor to shield households across the country from the impact of rising inflation.

Of course, we need to look at our energy mix going forward. However, I go back to my practical point: increasing production from the North Sea in the short term is not a practicably deliverable solution. Take Cambo, for example; members may disagree about whether Cambo should get the go-ahead, but, even if it were to get the go-ahead, 2026 is when it would first produce oil. The same is true of nuclear. Even if—and, for the avoidance of doubt, this is not a position that I support—we were to give the go-ahead to new nuclear energy today, it would be years if not decades before any of that came on stream. That is the practical reality.

We need to find solutions now and we need to ensure that we are accelerating the transition to renewable and low-carbon energy because that is not only the solution to the issue of dependence on Russian oil and gas over the medium to long term, but the responsible action to take in response to the climate emergency, which—I repeat—has not gone away.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It has not gone away, which is why I mentioned the drive towards net zero in my questions. However, we also have to see that the situation has changed fundamentally, not just in months and years but in recent weeks. The First Minister’s position does not seem to recognise the new reality: Russia’s war has changed the situation and we must accept that.

Scotland could deal a blow to Vladimir Putin by increasing domestic oil and gas production. We could increase that production now and end the need to import foreign oil and gas and could export more to reduce international reliance on Russian energy. Now is not the time to be ideological; now is the time to be practical and realistic. We have heard that from SNP voices—Fergus Ewing and Ian Blackford—so why do we not hear it from the First Minister?

The First Minister

I am not being ideological. I am trying to set out hard, practical reasons why what Douglas Ross is calling for is not a solution. We all feel a desire right now to find solutions to what is happening on a humanitarian level—even on a military level—and in terms of the implications for energy, inflation and the impact on us all. However, we do no one any favours if we suggest solutions that do not provide that panacea in the short term.

Douglas Ross has not engaged with what I have said at all. Right now, if we were to give the go-ahead to Cambo, for example, 2026 would be the earliest that it would start producing oil. If we were to give the go-ahead for new nuclear today, it would be years if not decades before that came on stream. Even if I were to agree—and I do not agree on all those matters—that those were the right things to do, they do not offer the solution that Douglas Ross is trying to suggest that they do. That does no one any favours.

We have to look at what the solutions are. In the immediate term, financial intervention to shield people from the impact of inflation is essential. Perhaps we would be better advised to come together in the Parliament to call on the chancellor to do that and act as he did at the start of the pandemic to provide that assistance. Then we can come together to look at every opportunity to accelerate the transition to renewable and low-carbon sources of energy.

The other point that Douglas Ross did not engage with in his latest questions is the Kwasi Kwarteng quote that I have just shared:

“as long as we depend on oil and gas ... we are all vulnerable to Putin’s malign influence”.

That is the point.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Produce more domestically!

The First Minister

Douglas Ross is saying that we should produce more domestically. Twice, now, I have set out the timescales for new production, and existing fields are not operating under capacity. We all want to find the solutions, but we must look at realistic ones. Let us avoid the tendency to use the issue as a way to have a go at each other and instead come together to find sensible solutions in the interests of the people we serve.

Rail Accident Investigation Branch Report (Stonehaven)

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. First, I join other party leaders in expressing our continued solidarity with the people of Ukraine. We continue to be horrified and heartbroken by the scenes that are rolling across our screens of the tragedies that are taking place in Ukraine and of the people suffering and fleeing war. However, nothing is more heartbreaking than the sight of a maternity unit being bombed by Russian forces. Vladimir Putin must fail, but let us also be clear that he is a war criminal and he must face justice.

I want to make two other points. First, I thank all those across Scotland and the United Kingdom who continue to donate to appeals to support the people of Ukraine and all those who do collections to send supplies to Ukraine. However, there are frustrations about how those supplies get to Ukraine and the neighbouring countries. We all need to do more to encourage the free flow of supplies.

My second point is about refugees. This goes beyond party politics; it is about people fleeing war and needing not just sanctuary but a home in Scotland. I am willing to join every other party leader in calling on the Home Secretary and the Home Office to do everything necessary to allow people to flee and make their home in Scotland.

Today, my thoughts and the thoughts of everyone in the chamber will also be with the families and friends of Brett McCullough, Donald Dinnie and Christopher Stuchbury, who died in the Stonehaven rail crash in 2020. Their deaths were a tragedy, and they were avoidable.

This morning’s report should shame Network Rail and Carillion, but there are questions for Abellio and the Scottish Government, too. The train that operated on that route was decades old. The trains were first introduced into service in the mid-1970s, and they did not comply with safety standards that were set in 1994. The report says that it is

“more likely than not that the outcome would have been better if the train had been compliant with modern crashworthiness standards.”

It goes on to say that the damage to the train

“was very extensive. A significantly higher casualty toll would have been likely if the train had been heavily loaded with passengers”.

Why did the Government agree to run trains that were over 40 years old and did not meet modern safety standards? Will the First Minister listen to staff and unions and withdraw them from service?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

My thoughts today are very much with the families and friends of

Donald Dinnie, Brett McCullough and Christopher Stuchbury and, indeed, all those who were injured and affected by the dreadful crash. Today will be an extremely difficult time for the families of the three men who tragically lost their lives, and we should all be thinking of them.

I am sure that this will be of no comfort to his loved ones, but it is important to point out that a key finding of the report is that there was nothing in the way that Brett McCullough drove the train that caused the accident. He drove within the rules and within the instruction given to him. It is important to record that.

I thank the Rail Accident Investigation Branch staff for their important work and thorough approach, and for the clarity of their findings and recommendations. It is important that those recommendations are now implemented.

On the specific point that Anas Sarwar raised, it is important to say—indeed, the report notes this—that the refurbished high-speed train that derailed was fully compliant with legal requirements to operate. However, since it was designed and constructed, railway standards have continued to improve, to reflect lessons learned from such investigations. The train operator—in this case, ScotRail—has the statutory duty to ensure that the trains that it operates are safe, and, of course, it is the statutory duty of the Office of Rail and Road, as the regulator, to oversee that duty, with enforcement if and when necessary. The Office of Rail and Road will monitor the work that is undertaken to address the Rail Accident Investigation Branch’s recommendations. That duty will, of course, pass to the new publicly owned and controlled ScotRail on 1 April. However, at the time of the crash, ScotRail was not owned by the Scottish Government as it will be in the future.

The final point that it is important to make is that, although the report is very important, it will not be the last report on that tragic incident. A further report is being undertaken by the Office of Rail and Road, which involves a joint investigation with Police Scotland and the British Transport Police. That investigation will report to the procurator fiscal later this year, which will allow prosecutors to consider questions of criminal prosecutions and a fatal accident inquiry. However, those are, of course, matters for the Lord Advocate.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

It is safe to say that we should not have allowed unsafe trains or trains that did not meet standards to be on our railways. I hope that, when ScotRail is under public ownership, that will be corrected immediately.

Three families have been failed, and staff continue to be failed because they are being asked to operate on trains that do not meet safety standards that were—I repeat—set in 1994. We know that Network Rail has plans to make more than 2,000 staff across the UK redundant, which is unacceptable. The Scottish Government, which will take ownership of ScotRail in a few weeks, is still refusing to rule out compulsory redundancies here, in Scotland. Let us not forget that we are talking about workers who kept us going through the pandemic. We cannot have a safe railway if we do not have a properly staffed railway.

In the light of today’s report, will the First Minister commit to no compulsory redundancies? Failing that, will she at least commit to no compulsory redundancies in safety-critical roles on Scotland’s railway?

The First Minister

I repeat that the thoughts of us all are with the families who have lost loved ones. It was a tragedy, and nothing that any of us or any report can say will remove or lessen the pain that they are going through. However, it is important that lessons are learned from any tragic incident such as this, and it is important that that is the case for this incident.

I will not repeat what I have already said in regard to the train, but it is important to underline the point that, according to the report, the accident was caused by a failure of the infrastructure and not the train, which was confirmed to have been properly licensed and approved to operate, albeit that I refer back to the comments that I made earlier.

On the transfer of ScotRail to public ownership, which I am proud that this Government is undertaking, we will, of course, continue to negotiate with the unions on all these matters, as would be expected of us. I will not pre-empt any of that, but I will say that this Government has a very strong record of no compulsory redundancies in the agencies for which we have responsibility. That commitment is important across a whole range of our responsibilities. The principles that have guided us to date will continue to guide us as we take over ownership of and responsibility for ScotRail next month.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The rail unions will welcome an unequivocal confirmation from the First Minister that there will be no compulsory redundancies, particularly in safety-critical roles.

Despite today’s report, there are still unanswered questions. We cannot allow it to be a report about which people say warm words but from which no meaningful action follows. The First Minister is right to say that we still have criminal investigations to conclude. There remain questions about the standard of trains and the levels of staffing.

What we must never forget is that at the heart of this are victims and families who have been failed by a powerful corporation and public bodies, and they should not have to wait years to get answers. We cannot allow this to become yet another in a long line of public scandals and tragedies in Scotland for which no one is held to account and from which institutions protect themselves rather than the public. As Kevin Lindsay of the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen—the train drivers’ union—said, we must do

“everything we can to bring the people responsible for this catastrophic event to justice.”

Will the First Minister do the same?

The First Minister

I read ASLEF’s comments this morning, and I totally understand, without hesitation, why it feels so strongly about the report and its findings. The rail family in Scotland, as in many countries, is a very close-knit one. They have lost one of their own in the tragedy, and I absolutely understand why they are making the comments they are making.

Anas Sarwar rightly poses his questions to me, but it is important to stress the independence of the investigations and to repeat—he has acknowledged this—that not only is the report not the final report but the remit of the Rail Accident Investigation Branch is to investigate such incidents on a no-blame basis. It is not there to apportion blame; it is there to establish the facts, which is what it has done.

The further investigation that is under way by the Office of Rail and Road, in parallel with Police Scotland and the British Transport Police, will report to the procurator fiscal, then it will be for the law officers and the Crown Office to determine whether there should be criminal prosecutions or a fatal accident inquiry. That would be the moment to consider any wider issues of accountability. It would be completely wrong for me to pre-empt the investigations or to try to curtail them in any way by commenting on the appropriate timescale. As I understand it, the latter investigation is due to report later this year.

The comments that have been made about the train are, of course, for the operating company. That is ScotRail, which, from 1 April, will be publicly owned. The comments in the report about the infrastructure—the report found that there was an infrastructure failure—are matters for Network Rail. I again point out that Network Rail remains a reserved body that is accountable to the UK Government and not directly accountable to this Government.

Railway safety is also reserved. Perhaps one of the wider, longer-term lessons on which the Parliament will want to reflect is whether that is right or whether the Parliament could come together and make the case for it to change, so that we have devolution not just of the operation of the railway but of the infrastructure on which it operates.

There are lots of lessons to learn, and I am committed to doing everything possible to ensure that they are learned.

Ukrainian Refugees (Visas)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

When talking about emergency visa waivers at Westminster yesterday, the Ukrainian ambassador to the United Kingdom told the Home Affairs Committee:

“At particular times, drastic measures should be taken. I believe something like a drop-in could be considered as well.“

In the light of that direct plea from the ambassador of our war-ravaged European neighbours, does the First Minister agree that the UK Government should adopt the position of the Irish Government, which has removed all visa barriers, to allow refugees to be welcomed quickly, safely and securely without delay? Does she agree that post-arrival paperwork and biometric work should be conducted in concert with the Ukrainian consul so that arrivals can securely settle anywhere across the UK’s common travel area?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, I strongly support that position. It is the position that the Republic of Ireland and countries across the European Union have adopted.

Yesterday, I spoke to a Ukrainian who lives in Scotland—a man who lives in Glasgow. His will be one of many stories. He spoke to me about the efforts to get his family members—his sister, in particular—to this country. She had managed to get to Poland after an arduous journey and the wall of bureaucracy that met her when she then tried to get to the UK was mind-boggling and inhumane in the circumstances.

As I said earlier, I welcome the movement that we appear to have had from Priti Patel and the Home Office this morning. When I came to the chamber, I was still trying to absorb all the details but, as I understand it, Ukrainians with a Ukrainian passport will now be able to apply for a visa online—but only through the family route, which is the only route that is open right now—rather than have to go to a visa application centre.

That is movement. I understand that, for such people, the biometric processes will be completed when they come to the UK. However, that approach still requires a visa application process, which is not good enough. We need to waive that process, allow people to get here and do the paperwork after that. That is not only the humanitarian thing to do; it is what other countries are doing.

We hope that, over the next couple of days, we will have confirmation from the UK Government of the opening of the community sponsorship route. That is being overseen by Michael Gove rather than the Home Office. I have had constructive discussions with him about it in the past couple of days. The Scottish Government has put to him and his officials a proposition that would allow us, in partnership with the Scottish Refugee Council and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, to run the scheme in Scotland so that we can ensure that people who come through it get the right support. The vast majority of people in Scotland want to welcome them with open arms, and that is what we are intent on doing if we possibly can and if the UK Government procedures allow us to do so.

Borders Railway (Extension)

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Scottish Borders Council papers reveal that the Scottish Government seeks the removal from the local development plan of any indication of a preferred route for a Borders rail extension from Tweedbank to Carlisle via Hawick. Will the First Minister give my constituents assurances that the Scottish National Party Government will not derail the project and that the route will go via Newcastleton?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

As I understand it and as I recall, those matters are being considered as part of the borderlands deal. We want to encourage the greatest possible connectivity and to get the greatest possible benefits from the Borders rail link and any extension to it. I will ask the Minister for Transport to write in greater detail about the processes that will be followed.

In Vitro Fertilisation (Suspension)

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

On Christmas eve, in vitro fertilisation treatment was suspended across Scotland for women who are not up to date with their Covid vaccinations. Scotland was the only part of the United Kingdom to do that and it was the only service in the national health service for which treatment was conditional on vaccination.

Last week, the chief medical officer announced that the service would resume, which is welcome. However, women arriving for IVF treatment have been sent away because a consent form from the Scottish Government’s central legal office had not yet been processed. That causes a continuing delay to treatment, which reduces the chances of women falling pregnant. Will the First Minister intervene to ensure that IVF treatment is not delayed any further?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, it is important to stress that the recommendation to temporarily defer fertility treatment for women who have not been fully vaccinated was taken as a clinical decision in response to emerging evidence and clinical concerns about the risk to mothers and babies of not being vaccinated. Those concerns were raised by lead clinicians in the four national health service assisted conception units.

The concerns were based on patient safety, and the decision affected a small number of patients, although I understand the distress and trauma that it will have caused. For the vast majority of women, treatment was able to proceed without delay. The chief medical officer is now recommending that fertility treatment for unvaccinated patients no longer needs to be deferred. That decision will be given immediate effect, so that the treatment of patients can recommence. I am not aware of the administrative issue that Jackie Baillie has raised, but I will look into it and make sure that, if the issue subsists, it is rectified as soon as possible.

Gas Prices

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

3. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government will do to mitigate the impact of volatile gas prices. (S6F-00874)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Rising gas prices are causing many people to worry about energy bills, especially with the price cap increase due in April. Alongside a wider package of cost of living support, the Scottish Government is providing a further £10 million for our fuel insecurity fund to ensure that support remains available for people who are at risk of self-disconnecting or severely rationing their energy use. However, energy markets are reserved, so we urge the United Kingdom Government to do significantly more to support consumers, which should include a cut to VAT on energy. As I reflected earlier, in the longer term, the gas price surge reinforces the need to end our dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the green transition, which the European Commission and UK Government ministers have been calling for this week.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

The Conservatives have shamelessly used the Russian invasion of Ukraine as an excuse to further expand fossil fuel production. Indeed, Douglas Ross has just called for the Scottish Government to ignore climate science and ramp it up. Not only does that dismiss the advice of the United Nations, the International Energy Agency and the Climate Change Committee, it also contradicts the integrated review of security, defence, development and foreign policy, which states:

“Ensuring the supply of secure, affordable and clean energy is essential to the UK’s national interests.”

Is it not the case that the best way that we can promote peace and security, tackle fuel poverty and secure our energy supply is by reducing our reliance on gas through the net zero buildings strategy, and by supporting a scaling up of renewable energy?

The First Minister

I agree with that. I will not repeat all the points that I made in response to Douglas Ross. Although I do not agree with the UK Government on all those matters, those arguments are being made by Government ministers, too.

Anybody who thinks that the horror in the Ukraine, although it is rightly taking all of our attention at the moment, means that the climate crisis has gone away need only read the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s latest report, which was published last week. The crisis has not gone away. Indeed, the impacts of climate breakdown are accelerating and we have a duty to take that extremely seriously. It is right that we have to accelerate the transition to clean sources of energy for the sake of the planet, but that is also right for the wider reason of energy security. We must all focus on doing that, which, of course, is what the Scottish Government is doing.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Fergus Ewing MSP has said that voluntarily ceasing exploration in the North Sea would increase Scotland’s carbon footprint by making it more reliant on fossil fuels from other countries. Alyn Smith has said that whether North Sea oil and gas production should be extended amid the war in the Ukraine is a “legitimate question”. Ian Blackford has pointed out that we can bring

“maximum pressure to be felt by Putin”

by cutting off western demand for Russian oil.

Does the First Minister recognise that support for her opposition to further North Sea exploration is now crumbling within her party, and that it is time to change course?

The First Minister

Members of my party are engaging in an intelligent way on the issues, and it is incumbent on us all to do that. On Ian Blackford’s comments, we should cut off demand for Russian oil and gas. For as long as states or companies are buying that, we are inadvertently helping to fund Putin’s illegal war and probably prolonging that war in the process.

Therefore, I call for import bans on Russian oil and gas by countries and states, and I welcome the albeit still limited action that the UK Government announced in that regard earlier this week.

I do not know whether Douglas Lumsden listened to the answers that I gave to Douglas Ross. I obviously take a different view on some of the issues but, even if I were to stand here and say that we should increase North Sea oil and gas production, the timescales and practicalities involved mean that that would not offer a solution to the immediate challenges that we face. I set out in some detail the timescales that would be involved. In the case of Cambo, which is the project that is closest to potentially being given approval by the UK Government, 2026 would be the earliest that it would start producing oil.

Let us not grasp at false solutions. Instead, let us focus on our obligations. Oil and gas are part of our energy mix right now, and will continue to be so during the transition. It is important to recognise that, but existing fields are not operating under capacity.

We must now focus on ensuring that the transition is a just one, that we invest in alternatives and that we protect jobs, because that is in the interest not just of helping to defeat Putin but of ensuring energy security and protecting our planet.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

Research by Energy Action Scotland shows that nearly 40 per cent of households will no longer be able to afford to heat their homes adequately due to rising energy prices. However, the Scottish Government has rowed back on its promise to create a publicly owned energy company, despite the outline business case showing that it would have produced annual savings for customers.

I seek clarity from the First Minister. Does she believe, as I do, that essential resources such as energy must be available to everyone on the basis of need, not ability to pay?

The First Minister

We have set out our position on a publicly owned energy company, why we changed our previous position and what we are focused on delivering now, so I will not rehearse all of that today.

I agree that energy is not a luxury; people have to be able to heat their homes. That is why it is so important that we do everything that we can, within our powers and resources, to help people to do that. However, such matters remain largely reserved to the UK Government, so it is incumbent on us all to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take the requisite action.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Come on!

The First Minister

I can understand why the Tories might groan at that answer, but I really do not understand why Labour members are doing so, because I am making exactly the same arguments that their colleagues in London are making right now. The chancellor must step up and act in order to protect households the length and breadth of the country. The question, and the mystery, is why Labour members are so upset by the fact that we are calling for that action.

Motor Neurone Disease (Barriers to Accessible Homes)

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the MND Scotland report “No Time to Lose: Addressing the housing needs of people with MND”, which highlights the barriers faced by people with motor neurone disease in securing adaptations or accessible homes. (S6F-00873)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I welcome the report that has been produced by MND Scotland, and I recognise that more needs to be done to ensure that people with degenerative illnesses such as motor neurone disease have the choice, dignity and freedom to access suitable homes.

We know that there are issues with the way in which adaptations are being accessed and delivered locally, so we are considering how the process can be streamlined and made easier for people who need adaptations.

We are working to increase the supply of accessible and adapted homes. Whenever possible, all new affordable homes are designed to be flexible so that they meet people’s needs as they change over time. We are also delivering a programme to retrofit homes in the social rented sector to makes them more accessible.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

The report tells of one man who was being washed on his decking because his family were awaiting accessible shower facilities. Average life expectancy for people with MND is just 18 months from diagnosis, so some will never get the adaptations that they need. As the report rightly states, people with MND should be making precious memories with friends and family during the time that they have left; they should not be fighting for the adaptations and accessible homes that they urgently need.

Will the Scottish Government meet MND Scotland to discuss the report’s recommendations and do all that it can, in collaboration with partners in local government, to ensure that people with MND can live in accessible homes with the care and dignity to which everyone is entitled?

The First Minister

Of course, we want

everyone, particularly at a time in their life when they are living with ill health or a condition such as MND, to be given the support that they need in order to live in their own home, and we want it to be suitable for them and their needs.

As I said a moment ago, I know that the adaptation system requires improvement and I recognise the particular need for speed for those with MND. As we take forward the review of the adaptations process, I or the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government would be happy to meet MND Scotland representatives to listen to their views and hear more about the MND Scotland report and its recommendations.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Last night, the Glasgow film festival premiered a film about Ady Barkan—a man with MND—and his activism, and I commend the film to all in the chamber.

At present, only 1 per cent of housing is fully accessible for wheelchair users; around 10,000 disabled people are on waiting lists; and I have constituents—disabled people—who have waited more than six years for an accessible home. Does the First Minister agree that that is unacceptable? What urgent action will the Scottish Government take to meet disabled people’s housing needs?

The First Minister

I have already made the point that more action is needed. In 2020-21, 95 per cent of new-build homes that were delivered by housing associations and councils—where information was returned on housing for varying needs—met the accessibility standards, but much more needs to be done across all tenures of housing.

We are currently reviewing “Housing for Varying Needs: a design guide”, which is a good standard but is now more than 20 years old. We also have flexible grant funding arrangements in place to ensure that specialist housing provision, which is identified by local authorities as a priority, can be supported. We will continue to focus on all these issues and I have already recognised how important they are for everybody who has particular needs but particularly for those who live with conditions such as MND.

I will make a point of watching the film that Pam Duncan-Glancy has brought to my attention.

Covid-19 Booster (Spring Roll-out)

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

5. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on the spring roll-out of the Covid-19 booster vaccine. (S6F-00884)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Of course, vaccination remains a critical component of our Covid response. To date, 86.3 per cent of eligible people in Scotland aged 18 and over have received a third or booster dose of vaccine, and our vaccine delivery rate continues to be the highest of anywhere in the United Kingdom. We welcome the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation’s recommendation that we offer some of the most vulnerable groups an additional vaccine dose in the spring of this year. From the start of this week, we began the process of delivering that in care homes and also started to invite all those who are now eligible for their additional booster. Those vaccinations will continue over the next few months, as those individuals become eligible when they reach six months from the date of their last dose. We continue to act on JCVI advice and we are planning for a number of scenarios, including an annual booster programme for those who are most at risk.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister will recall that, during a previous vaccine booster campaign, there were several issues with the roll-out in the Highlands and Islands, including incorrect details on letters that went out to the public about where people should go to get their booster. Given that the spring campaign is targeted at the most vulnerable groups in society, what action has the Scottish Government taken to prevent such mistakes from happening again?

The First Minister

We have had engagement and dialogue with NHS Highland about the previous experience, and I hope that that mistake will not be repeated.

However, it is important to point out that, among JCVI priority groups, NHS Highland uptake has generally been very good, particularly among care home residents, 98 per cent of whom have received a booster or third dose. Therefore, the delivery roll-out has gone well but, of course, we take action to ensure that administrative difficulties are learned from and not repeated. That is the case with NHS Highland and any other health board.

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

I welcome the programme for the roll-out of boosters in the spring, and I declare an interest, because I might be lucky enough to be in one of those cohorts. However, with the potential removal of mandatory face coverings and social distancing and the increasing prevalence of Covid infections, does the First Minister agree that lateral flow tests should remain funded and free on request? What discussions has the Scottish Government had with the UK Treasury in that regard?

The First Minister

Given that I know the age of people to whom we are now offering the additional boosters, I am too scared to suggest whether Christine Grahame is likely to be included in those groups, so I will err on the side of caution on that front.

Testing is an important issue. As I set out in the chamber a couple of weeks ago, we are developing a managed transition plan to ensure that Scotland continues to have an effective, albeit proportionate, testing response and an effective surveillance infrastructure. Access to polymerase chain reaction

The Presiding Officer

Question 6 has been withdrawn. I will take a couple of brief supplementaries.

House Insulation (Western Isles)

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

The First Minister will be aware that Tighean Innse Gall, the housing agency in the Western Isles, announced last week that it would no longer be able to administer Government-funded insulation projects. That is not for any lack of funding but because of PAS 2035 regulations on ventilation, which have caused demand for such schemes to collapse in the islands. Given that the Western Isles is almost certainly one of the most fuel-poor communities in Europe, what can the Scottish Government do to urgently ensure that those vital insulation installations continue?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, I understand that what is a new United Kingdom-wide set of retrofit standards has created challenges in the Western Isles. Over the past week, we have followed that up with the housing provider and the council, restating our commitment to finding a solution that enables them to continue to improve the warmth and ventilation of people’s homes. I know that Dr Allan has raised the issue before and I believe that he has received a copy of the most recent correspondence.

Officials are also working with the British Standards Institution to further improve the new retrofit standards to ensure that circumstances in remote rural and island communities are taken fully into account. We value the housing work that is done in the Western Isles and hope that the issue can be reconsidered now, in light of our further discussions, and that we will continue to see that expertise applied in the Western Isles.

Out-of-hours General Practitioner Services (Clackmannanshire)

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Clackmannanshire’s out-of-hours general practitioner service is in crisis. Late last year, assurances were sought regarding the situation and reassurance was given by the local MSP and the council group leader that NHS Forth Valley remained committed to providing services in Clackmannanshire. However, despite the rhetoric, the service is being eroded. GPs who had been appointed to the service are being told that they are no longer required and NHS Forth Valley regularly goes into code black. The situation is jeopardising the safety of patients. What action can be put in place to maintain, retain and sustain the service for the people of Clackmannanshire?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

That is an important issue. I am aware of the difficulty that NHS Forth Valley is facing and I have been assured that it is working hard to continue to provide a service and that it remains committed to doing so, which is important. The Scottish Government is currently working with NHS Forth Valley to review the service. That review is in its early stages, but the aim will be to ensure a safe and sustainable service moving forward. Officials are also following up with the chief executive as a matter of urgency to identify and secure solutions for the current situation and to develop longer-term plans. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has asked this week for further details on how the board intends to address the shortages. I am sure that he would be happy to correspond with the member with further detail when he receives that.

Ukrainian Seasonal Workers (Support and Assistance)

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Today’s announcement from the United Kingdom Government on the Ukrainian humanitarian scheme is significant, but I agree with the First Minister that it does not go far enough. Ukrainian seasonal workers across Scotland, many of whom are my constituents in Fife, are still barred from bringing their family members to safety and still subject to the abhorrent no recourse to public funds conditions. What further support and assistance can the Scottish Government provide to Ukrainian seasonal workers who are still at the harsh end of the UK Government’s hostile environment?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We are trying to influence UK Government decisions on the matter every day right now. Currently, the only route open for Ukrainians is the family reunification scheme. It is still too limited, in my view, and it is also, as we have painfully seen in recent days, horrendously bureaucratic. We are asking for that to be streamlined and asking for visa requirements to be waived, but we are also seeking assurances, which I hope will be given, that people coming here, whether they come under that route or the community sponsorship route that I hope will open in the next few days, will be able to work and have access to public funds, and that the Scottish Government will able to work with our partners to ensure full support for everybody who comes here.

We continue to pursue those discussions with the UK Government. No country should have to be shamed into doing right by refugees. It is appalling that that is the case. As I said the other day, I hope that we get to a position in which we open not only our hearts to people in Ukraine—I think that we have all done that—but our doors, by allowing them to come here and ensuring that they have the support that they need to recover from their trauma and to try to rebuild their lives, while we all hope for peace in their country.

Deaths of Young People in Custody

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Jack McKenzie, Katie Allan, William Lindsay, Robert Wagstaff and Liam Kerr—those five young people all took their own lives at Polmont young offenders institution within the past five years. The Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland believes that the conditions for children in prison were in breach of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the prohibition on torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment in article 3 of the European convention on human rights.

How many more damning reports will be published and how many more young people will have to die before this shameful situation comes to an end?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I make it very clear that we fully support a presumption against any people under the age of 18 being dealt with through the criminal justice system.

Since the shift towards prevention in 2007, there have been positive changes in youth justice. According to official statistics, at 30 June 2007, there were 221 young people under the age of 18 in custody. As of Tuesday this week, the figure was 15. Between 2008-09 and 2019-20, there was an 85 per cent reduction in the number of children and young people who were prosecuted in courts and a 93 per cent reduction in the number of 16 and 17-year-olds who were sentenced to custody.

However, there is more to do. In line with our commitment to keeping the Promise, we are committed to reducing that number further. We all want Scotland’s young people to be safeguarded within the youth justice system and kept out of young offenders institutions, and we will consult shortly on necessary legislative changes to underpin the changes in practice that I have just narrated.

The Presiding Officer

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

Social Care Staff Pay

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-02777, in the name of Alex Rowley, on the long-standing underpayment of social care staff. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes the belief that the longstanding underpayment of social care staff should end, and that action must be taken to address the inequalities across the health and social care sector in order to deliver greater dignity and respect within the profession; considers that the rate of pay for social care staff, including in the Mid Scotland and Fife region, does not come anywhere near to recognising the complexities and challenges of the work; further considers that the main underlying cause of recruitment and retention issues in the care sector is a result of poor pay and unequal terms and conditions; condemns what it considers the poor treatment faced by many care workers in the course of their employment, which, it believes, would not be acceptable in any other profession, and notes the calls for all workers being hired directly or indirectly to deliver key public services to be paid the proper rate for the work they undertake.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank those members who made today’s debate possible by signing my motion. In particular, I thank Willie Rennie and Murdo Fraser for signing the motion allowing the debate to take place.

I was surprised that the Greens refused to sign the motion, given the fact that the treatment of workers that it describes happens every day in every community across Scotland. The refusal of Scottish National Party members to sign what is a factual statement demonstrates the “stick your head in the sand and hope it fixes itself” approach to a growing crisis that is impacting on older people in Mid Scotland and Fife and across all of Scotland.

Let me be clear. I do not intend the debate to point blame at any political party—far from it. I am attempting to say that, unless we act now to address the unequal and unfair treatment of care workers, we will not fix the growing crisis in the provision of community care in Scotland.

It is a fact that care workers on the poorest terms and conditions and the lowest pay are walking away from being carers. Why would they stay when they are treated so poorly? When we look at the way that some care workers are treated, is it any wonder that firms cannot recruit new staff and are losing the staff that they have?

Some will say that there are labour shortages in many sectors and that Brexit has made those challenges even more difficult. That is true. Why, then, would someone choose to work in a sector with very demanding jobs when those jobs have some of the worst terms and conditions in Scotland’s labour market?

Last week, while giving evidence to members on the Public Audit Committee on his report into social care, Scotland’s Auditor General, Stephen Boyle, said that improvements must be made urgently and warned that some things

“cannot wait until the establishment of a national care service.”—[

Official Report, Public Audit Committee

, 3 March 2022; c 23.]

The committee heard that there are

“major problems with recruitment and retention”—[

Official Report, Public Audit Committee

, 3 March 2022; c 3.]

in the social care sector and that existing staff do not feel valued or properly paid.

I have talked to care workers who work an eight-hour shift but are paid for only five or six of those hours because they are not paid for the time that they use to travel between clients. They tell me that they often work 10 or 11 hours, because they are on a split shift with a two-hour break in the day, and, if their clients are miles away from where they live, they have to sit in their car during those hours. They are given a mileage allowance of 25p per mile for travel between clients, but they are not paid for their own time. They get 25p per mile when MSPs get 48p per mile, as is the case for the majority of public sector workers.

The difference between council staff working as carers and those in the private sector is astounding. It cannot be allowed to continue. Council staff will be paid for the hours that they work, not only for the hours that they spend in a person’s house. They will get the same travel allowance as all public sector workers. How can it be that we have two sets of workers, doing the very same job and being paid by the public purse to deliver the same public services, being treated so differently?

As the Auditor General told members last week:

“The predominantly female workforce does not feel adequately rewarded or valued. There are also major problems with recruitment and retention ... The Scottish Government now needs to take action to improve working conditions for this vitally important workforce, otherwise it will not be able to deliver its ambitions for social care.”—[

Official Report, Public Audit Committee

, 3 March 2022; c 3.]

On Tuesday, the Government launched a consultation on what is working well and what needs to change in social care. The health secretary, Humza Yousaf, said:

“I want Scotland to be the best place in the world to grow old, with older people living full and rewarding lives, contributing to society and actively involved in their health and social care.”

I am here today because older people are having their care packages cut. People in desperate need are not able to get a care package. The number of people who are trapped in hospital because they cannot get home as there is no care package to support them is increasing. What is the reason for that? The private companies that have been commissioned by the health and social care partnerships through a procurement process to deliver half-hour and hour blocks of care say that they can pay the staff only for what they are being paid for, which is the blocks of care that have been commissioned.

As a result, the care workers end up being treated poorly. That is the main point. The workers might be paid by private companies, but the money comes from Government. The contracting and commissioning is done through the Government’s health and social care partnerships. Putting the work out to tender through the commissioning regime means that it is cheaper for the partnerships. Let me be clear that that practice, which results in appalling treatment of care workers, has been practised by all political parties when in power. It is not about trying to blame one political party; it is about recognising that care on the cheap does not and will not work.

I am well aware of the on-going debate about a national care service. I and my party will fully engage in that, but I stress that, unless we deal with the poor terms and conditions and low pay of care workers now, the problems will just get worse and worse, and older people will pay the price through their suffering. Let us deal with this issue and deal with it now.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I

welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and I recognise Alex Rowley for securing it. He has just outlined the complexity of the care system. My first job when I left school, before I started my nurse training, was in a care home. I know that that was a long time ago, but I remember the complexity of the work that we were trained for and asked to do.

I want to be clear from the outset that our social care workforce here in Scotland are absolutely valued. They do crucial work every day, often in very challenging circumstances. The Covid-19 pandemic has emphasised the need for our social care sector to be supported and valued.

Social care includes all types of personal and practical support for children, young people and adults who require it. It includes a wide range of roles, such as home carers, care home staff, activity and care co-ordinators, care managers, social work assistants, children and young persons support workers, day centre staff, cleaners in care settings, admin support staff and many others. It is important to keep that in mind when discussing the sector. It is more complex than just being about one job, one role or one pay scale.

Social care is an investment in Scotland’s people, society and economy. Many of us or our family members or friends will already use social care, and many of us will need to use it at some point in our lives.

The social care sector in Scotland employs approximately 200,000 people and has an estimated financial value to Scotland’s economy of £3.4 billion. The sector is hugely important, and a lot of work is going on to improve it and the experience of its workforce.

The Scottish Government is committed to supporting people to stay at home or in a homely setting with maximum independence for as long as possible.

It is crucial to attract and retain the right people to work in social care, support and social work. That has not been helped by the withdrawal from the European Union, as Alex Rowley said.

We need to raise the status of social care as a profession. We have discussed that in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, of which I am a member. To do that, the Scottish Government has embarked on the largest reform of adult social care in Scotland. Working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, people with lived experience, unpaid carers and other stakeholders, the Scottish Government has developed priorities that are currently being implemented when it comes to social care. They include

“a shared agreement on the purpose of adult social care support, with a focus on human rights”

and

“social care support that is centred on a person, how they want to live their life, and what is important to them”.

What matters to them is important. Another priority is

“changing attitudes towards social care support, so that it is seen as an investment in Scotland’s people, society and economy”.

That is also valuable. A further priority is:

“strengthening the quality and consistency of co-production at local and national level”.

Derek Feeley’s independent review of adult social care was a crucial step towards the creation of the national care service for Scotland. It will enable us to improve the experiences of everybody who works in or uses social care. The review was comprehensive and found many aspects of our adult social care system that are worthy of celebration, such as the introduction of self-directed support. The Carers (Scotland) Act 2016 is also important, as is the introduction of free personal care.

Given the aims that the Government has in mind, which also include the principles of fair work, we need to welcome the fact that the Scottish Government is taking issues forward, and I look forward to working further with the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee to look at what we can do. I also look forward to hearing from the minister in his response.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank Alex Rowley for securing what is an important debate, for his considered contribution and for his long-standing commitment to social care.

I start my speech by thanking everyone in the social care system for all the work that they have done and that they will go on to do. I also thank those unpaid carers—some very young and some much older; often family members—who look after many in our communities. They are unsung heroes.

We are all accustomed to paying tribute to the valuable work that is done by our national health service staff, but our care and support workers do not always get the public recognition that they deserve. However, never has our front-line workforce demonstrated such extraordinary dedication, compassion and selfless commitment.

As Alex Rowley said, the Government urgently needs to address the social care crisis. Pay and conditions are part of the solution to that crisis. Heroic staff are overwhelmed, and care is still being provided on the cheap. Staff went above and beyond during the pandemic, but they have not been given the leadership or the appreciation that they deserve, and people who require care services are suffering as a result.

Audit Scotland’s report on social care, published in January, should act as a wake-up call. The report revealed a social care system in which

“Staff are not adequately valued, engaged, or rewarded for their vitally important role.”

Audit Scotland also reported that the average hourly rate across all care in Scotland is just £9.79. We must also bear in mind the fact that the new £10.50 rate will not apply to all who work in social care.

We must remember that 15 per cent of social care workers work unpaid overtime, 13 per cent of the workforce work more than 50 hours a week, and two in 10 are not on permanent contracts. The industry is undermined by long hours, low pay and low recognition, which means that care providers struggle to keep staff. It cannot be right that supermarkets and shops often pay more and appear to offer a greater sense of career progression. That is wrong and must change.

It angers staff when they are described as low skilled when, in fact, their roles are highly skilled and complex. They have to understand medical needs, deliver medication and possess soft skills such as empathy and tact.

It is clear that there are problems of recruitment difficulties, rising sickness absences and high vacancy levels. The SNP’s solution to that, in part, is to develop a national care service. However, far from being a positive step, that could be perceived as a direct assault on local government by removing accountability and, potentially, undermining patient care. Instead of reorganising the chairs on the deck, ministers must now urgently and meaningfully engage with carers, staff, those who work in the sector and those who need support.

Dr Donald Macaskill, the chief executive of Scottish Care, has warned that the industry is at risk of disintegration and collapse. We simply cannot wait for a national care service.

I accept that additional funding has been made available. In 2024-25, Scotland will benefit from an additional £1.1 billion as a result of the health and social care levy. However, if the Government is really committed to ensuring that every person receives the care that they need in order to be provided with the dignity that they deserve, it must take urgent action to address the needs of the workforce. That means better workforce planning. We need to show the people who show an exceptional level of personal commitment and accountability that they are valued when it comes to pay and conditions. It is time to respect and reward those who work in social care and to end providing care on the cheap, as Alex Rowley rightly said. Too often, staff are on the forgotten front line. We look to the Government to change that.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Paul O’Kane, who joins us remotely.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I thank my colleague Alex Rowley for securing this extremely important debate and for his powerful speech outlining the issues. I pay tribute to all our care workers across Scotland, who work, day in and day out, to look after and care for older people, people who have disabilities and people with long-term and life-limiting conditions. Their contribution is immense and their work brings dignity, respect and, indeed, happiness to the lives of so many and their families.

Caring is an essential service in our communities, but it is more than that. It is a vocation; a role that dedicated and compassionate people offer themselves to—and we know from the figures they are very often women.

Colleagues might not know this, but, when I was a student, I worked in a care home. I was an activities organiser, which means that, among other things, I can call a really mean—[

Inaudible

.]—bingo. The experience taught me a lot about older people and the challenges of living with an illness such as dementia. Although I played a small part in a wider team, it was nothing compared with the contribution of the care staff: they taught me the most.

I was always in awe of the dedication and patience of the care staff and the genuine care with which they supported the people living in the home. They took time to get to know them and their families, found ways to brighten their day with stories or songs, fiercely protected their dignity and independence, and shared with families all the news and important moments that they may have missed during the day or week.

In my job prior to being elected to the Parliament, I had the honour of helping to tell some of the most amazing stories about personal assistants at Enable Scotland and the work that they did during lockdown. That work included recreating at home the Friday nights spent at the favourite social club of the person whom they cared for, arranging for local pipers to play outside people’s homes and linking people up with their loved ones via digital methods. They went above and beyond because they cared.

Respect for their work and the rates of pay never matched what those staff gave, despite the efforts of some employers—particularly in the third sector—and they still do not today. That should shame us all. We must acknowledge the skilled and vocational nature of the work and pay people what they deserve, as the motion calls for.

I was struck by the recent Common Weal report highlighting the current failings in our care system and calling for ambitious reforms with the advent of a national care service to deliver the changes that we need. As I have said in the chamber many times, this has to be about values, not structures, and those values begin with our people—the people who deliver care across Scotland.

We do not have to wait—we can act now. Scottish Labour has joined our trade unions—particularly my union, the GMB—in calling for a £15-an-hour minimum wage for care workers. We advocated for that in the last two budget processes, but it has been rejected in favour of a 48p rise. If we are serious about honouring what was said in the pandemic about the value of carers, who were called “Covid heroes”, that must be matched by our action.

There is more to do. We need to provide better support for the wellbeing of care staff through breaks and the supply of food, rest areas and support services; more standardised qualifications that can be accredited and recognised across the care system; apprenticeships in care, which would show that it is a valued and important career choice for our younger people; and clearer progression routes for workers, so that they can get on.

It is clear that we owe all our carers across the country a huge debt of gratitude. We trust them with the most precious thing in our lives—our family members—in often difficult and challenging circumstances, so we should offer them a rate of pay and a set of conditions that meet that huge responsibility and reflect their talent and dedication.

Labour members will continue to urge the Government to act, while offering our own vision of what care should be in Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Gillian Mackay, who joins us remotely.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. It was quite difficult to hear Mr O’Kane. I picked up the bulk of what he said, but it was not easy. If we are to hear from Ms Mackay online, could we try to do something to boost the sound a little bit, please?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you for your point of order, minister. I noted that the sound was patchy. I am sure that the broadcasting unit has heard your plea, and I hope that it acts on it. Let us see how we go with Gillian Mackay, who is there and ready.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will try to use my outside voice, just in case the sound is still quiet.

Care workers perform an extremely challenging, complex and skilled role. They look after our loved ones, often when they are unwell, vulnerable or coming to the end of their lives. I offer my heartfelt thanks to care workers for all that they do.

For too long, the enormous contribution of care workers to our society has gone unrecognised. They were classed as low skilled by the United Kingdom Government, and we all know that that is simply not true.

It was international women’s day on Tuesday, and the theme was “break the bias”. In light of that, it is worth noting, as many other members have done, that with women making up approximately 85 per cent of the workforce, the failure to properly appreciate social care workers is linked to how we value caring roles, which are traditionally performed by women. I was struck by the words of Fiona Collie from Carers UK, who said in evidence to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee:

“We often talked about the important role that the national health service plays, but we talked less about the significant role that social care plays in maintaining people’s independence and enabling them to live good and positive lives ... The role of social care has been very hidden.”—[

Official Report, Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

, 22 February 2022; c 2.]

It is right that social care has now become a national focus—that is long overdue. The pandemic may have highlighted the undervaluation of care workers, but that has been a problem since long before any of us had heard of Covid 19. Care staff were often working in difficult conditions before the pandemic, contending with low pay, long hours and insecure work, but for the past two years, they have also had to deal with a dangerous virus that has devastated care homes.

The interim findings of a workforce survey conducted by Scottish Care were published in September. One finding was that the number of hours that staff were working was markedly high, with increasing pressure on them to maintain the same quality of care while working longer hours. Almost 50 per cent of organisations relayed that their staff were working more than 35 hours a week. I am extremely concerned about the physical and mental wellbeing of care workers who have been under such sustained pressure. As we seek to help social care recover from the pandemic, we must prioritise workplace wellbeing. Some care workers may have been traumatised by their experiences and they must be able to access mental health support when they need it.

As we enter the recovery period, we are also creating a new national care service, the cornerstone of which will be improved terms and conditions for staff, with the Greens and the Scottish Government committing to deliver ethical commissioning that promotes fair work. That is vital. The report “Independent Review of Adult Social Care in Scotland” highlighted that

“The current approach to commissioning and procurement is characterised by mistrust, conflict and market forces.”

At the moment, commissioning and procurement processes are largely focused on cost, which can squeeze pay and conditions. Ethical commissioning would shift the emphasis from cost and cover a range of factors, including workforce terms and conditions, investment by providers in training and support for staff, and the quality of care. We must ensure that staff can access the training that they need, as well as opportunities for career development and progression. That will be key to improving both recruitment and retention. That is why we have also committed to a system of national collective bargaining, through which we will deliver improved pay, terms and conditions.

The increase in the minimum wage for adult social care staff to £10.50 is an initial step in improving pay for care workers, but we recognise that the work is far from over, and we will continue towards delivering pay that recognises the incredible work that care staff do.

Once again, I extend my thanks to everyone working in the social care sector. We recognise that care workers’ pay, terms and conditions must continue to improve. We will continue to work towards that, and we will create a national care service in which staff are properly valued and respected.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I thank Mr Rowley for his considered contribution today, and for the tone and tenor of what he outlined.

If we took that approach more often in the Parliament, we would do a lot better, so I thank Mr Rowley for that.

I thank the social care workforce for their remarkable work in providing critical and invaluable support to people across our country. Although a lot of attention has been paid in the debate to the social care workers who deliver care, like Emma Harper, I also acknowledge the domestic, cleaning, maintenance and administration teams whose vital work keeps these critical services running. Therefore, I thank every member of the social care workforce, including two of my nieces who are social care workers—although one of them is currently having a wee bit of time off on maternity leave.

I thank Mr Rowley for bringing this important debate to the chamber, and I thank members for their contributions. However, I object to the idea that the Scottish Government does not value the social care workforce, because we do, and we are fully committed to improving pay and conditions for the predominantly female workforce. The social care system as it stands is complex, with more than 1,200 employers and huge variation across Scotland, as Derek Feeley acknowledged in his report “Independent Review of Adult Social Care in Scotland”. Despite that, we are taking action, with partners in local government, to make improvements now.

Since 2016, the Scottish Government has provided funding to ensure that adult social care workers who are delivering direct care are paid at least the real living wage. We have led the way across the UK in ensuring that those workers have that minimum rate of pay, and the Welsh Government is following our lead by adopting that policy from April this year.

However, we are now going beyond that. In the past few months, we have committed to deliver two significant increases in pay. A mid-year uplift was delivered in December, which meant that adult social care workers’ pay increased to at least £10.02 per hour—an increase of more than 5 per cent. In April, the minimum hourly rate for those providing adult social care will rise to £10.50 per hour—a further increase of 4.8 per cent. For a full-time adult social care worker on the minimum rate, the increase to £10.50 per hour represents an uplift of more than £1,600 over the next financial year.

The £10.50 hourly rate in Scotland is 60p higher than the real living wage rate of £9.90 per hour that will apply to workers in Wales from April. In addition, Scotland’s minimum rate is significantly higher than the national living wage rate that is paid to many social care workers in England and Northern Ireland, as workers there receive £1 an hour less than workers in Scotland.

Of course, those are minimum rates of pay; Mr Rowley is right to point out that some folk are paid more, and that there sometimes seems to be an unfairness in that regard. We have heard from the Labour Party and others about proposals to increase pay to £15 per hour. However, that would cost £1.75 billion. We need to have a discussion on how we can do better while being realistic about what is achievable, because we cannot spend money twice, which is what some of the suggestions would mean. I am more than willing to speak to Mr Rowley and others on those points, and we need to go further, but we all have to grasp the reality that we will have to work through some of this and find the money, because we cannot spend that money twice. My door is open to Mr Rowley and others to bring forward any credible ideas that they may have.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the minister for his commitment to fair pay for the sector. When the Government is changing pay rates in social care, can he tell us what assessment it makes of the issue of differentials, where there is an impact on other care home workers? The Government may not reimburse private sector providers, in particular, for those increases, which will then feed through the system.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

There is a huge complexity to all of this. The two recent pay rises do not come without difficulties. What we have to do, in partnership with others, is ensure that the money that the Government has provided actually gets into the pockets and purses of the workers. Given that there are 1,200 different employers, that is not as easy as it sounds. The discussions that we have had with COSLA, local government, health and social care partnerships and others, including third sector and private sector employers, have thrown up other anomalies that we have to work through. In the very near future, I will be having meetings to discuss what has happened and the impacts on other sectors.

We are looking at the issue that the member raised, too, but, as it stands, at this moment in time, it is immensely complex.

Mr Rowley was right to highlight the different forms of procurement, some of which certainly did not happen when he and I were in local government. There has been too much emphasis on getting value for money instead of ensuring quality services for people, including by paying staff well and having a workforce with the freedom and autonomy to do what is right for the clients they visit and care for on a daily basis.

That is why the ethical procurement that Gillian Mackay mentioned is so important. We have to get this absolutely right. Ethical procurement includes fair work, but I would point out that it is not just about that. Caring is a profession, and, in order to attract new—and young—people into it, we must ensure that they see an opportunity to advance in their careers. That is why it is so important that we have the right apprenticeships in place and that we enable people to continuously improve, get qualifications and swap careers between social care, social work and the NHS if and when it is right to do so. I am committed to doing all of that.

We must build a social care system for the future that has human rights at its very heart and that takes a person-centred approach, and we must include in all of that fair pay and fair work for the people who work in it. We will continue to engage with our national care service proposals to get that right. However, we cannot wait for the national care service itself to make some of those improvements. In that respect, I will continue to talk to COSLA, which has been very positive with the Government as we have looked at what more we can do.

The Government is absolutely committed to improving the experience of the workforce through fair work practices. We deeply value and respect the vital role played by social care workers in our communities. Let us be honest: without them, life over the past two years would have been very different for many people. My plaudits go to them, and my door is open to others to see how we can work together to improve things further on this front.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the debate. I suspend the meeting until 2.15 pm.

13:28 Meeting suspended.

14:15 On resuming—

Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

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

The next item of business is Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body questions. As ever, I invite members who wish to ask a supplementary question to indicate that during the relevant question. If questions can be succinct, with answers to match, that will allow us to make more progress.

Scottish Parliament Building (Lighting)

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, in light of the symbols of solidarity seen across the world, whether it will, and has the equipment necessary to, light the Scottish Parliament building in the colours of the Ukraine flag at night. (S6O-00860)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The demonstrations of solidarity with the people of Ukraine across Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom are important and show that we support their struggle.

The corporate body recognises that the Scottish Parliament wishes to play its part. In response to the events in Ukraine, the Presiding Officer instructed officials of the Parliament to fly the Ukrainian flag. That started on Monday 28 February. The Parliament held a debate in the chamber and showed its solidarity. Unfortunately, the Parliament does not have the technical infrastructure to illuminate the building at this point in time.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

There might be other occasions when we want the Parliament to make a statement. Nowadays, lighting up a building in the colours of a particular organisation or country is the expected way to do that. The Queen Elizabeth hospital in Glasgow, for example, has that facility. I ask the corporate body to reconsider the matter and examine what the cost might be.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

We work closely with Poppyscotland and, as part of that relationship, the Parliament has been illuminated. We had then to hire equipment.

We want to ensure that any displays that we do are respectful to the organisation concerned. There are some technical difficulties with lighting this building—its construction and design make it difficult to project things on to it—but we are happy to take the matter away and look at it again. The costs previously seemed prohibitive, but I take on board John Mason’s comments about the need for Parliament to show connection with certain organisations. Lighting up the building is an effective way to do it.

Scots Language

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what action it is taking to advance and support the use of the Scots language across the Scottish Parliament campus. (S6O-00858)

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

Fur historical forby cultural reasons, the Scots Pairlamentary Corporate Body leid policy taks tent o the yaise o Scots.

For historical and cultural reasons, the SPCB language policy recognises the use of Scots. We support MSPs in using Scots in a number of ways: in the chamber, in committees, with constituents and when taking their oath or making their affirmation. For example, MSPs can use Scots in the chamber and committees. If it is just a few words and the meaning can be readily understood or the MSP immediately translates, that can readily be accommodated. For more lengthy speeches, the prior agreement of the Presiding Officer or convener is required.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Muckle thanks tae Christine Grahame fur thon repone. Oor Pairlament’s committee reports and ither warks are awready available, by request, in Gaelic, British Sign Language or ither accessible formats—which is, o coorse, walcome. As wark is gan on tae support fowk tae yaise their ain leid—that it is gree’d that they can yaise and that is yin o oor three national leids—wull the SPCB commit tae explorin whither the executive summaries o committee reports could be publishit in Scots, as we pit a refreshed focus on Scots in oor ain national Pairlament?

If ye want me tae translate it intae English, Presiding Officer, Ah wull.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I think that that is fine.

Christine Grahame, do you want a translation, or are you okay?

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

I think that I shall cope. We shall find out.

As is reflected in our language policy, all bills, delegated legislation and their accompanying documents are in English. When an MSP or a committee considers that there are good reasons for translation into a language other than English, it can be requested through the clerks. However, I am not clear whether that covers executive summaries of reports. I will discuss that with my colleagues, confirm it and return to the member when I am clear.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Would the corporate body hae a thocht tae the idea that, if a motion is pit in in the mither twang o the member—fur exemple, the Doric—or the subject o the motion is the mither twang, wir practice the noo is flipped ower so that the mither twang motion is first and nae the English een?

Ah can translate if needed.

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

At the moment, I am afraid that they are published first in English and then in another language. Scots includes the Doric—indeed, it is a range of dialects such as Lallans and Scotch, as well as more local dialects such as Buchan, Dundonian, Glesga and Shetland—so it is more complicated. Nevertheless, Scots, which includes the Doric, continues to be recognised by the SPCB.

With a languages bill expected from the Scottish Government, we will have to allow that political process to progress. The SPCB will reflect any legislative or policy changes to its operations, including the

Official Report

and the

Business Bulletin

.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you. As Neil Gray would confirm, Orcadian will also be recognised.

Constituency and Regional Offices

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how many members have been unable to establish a constituency or regional office. (S6O-00821)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

And in English. It goes without saying that all members who are entitled to a constituency office must be able to find a route to access one. Currently, four members have yet to secure an office and are still looking for one. Most members have secured, or are in the process of securing, either an office or a second office. A small number have decided not to have an office.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

It is my understanding that both constituency and regional members of the Scottish Parliament for Edinburgh and the Lothians have been the last to be able to source office spaces. That has also presented issues with regard to the need for individual members to meet the additional access and security requirements that the corporate body is now suggesting that all MSPs take into account. Will the corporate body investigate a potential Edinburgh weighting for allowances? Will it look at how we can utilise all our allowances in the way we would like to so that we can represent our constituents in the Parliament?

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

The corporate body has had fairly extensive discussions about office accommodation. We recognise that there are variable office accommodation costs in the different regions and cities in Scotland and that those costs are not equal. We also understand that there is a particular issue in Edinburgh and the Lothians and that costs there are particularly high. We recognise that and have tried to build additional funding into the scheme. We are prepared, where it can be evidenced that reasonable premises can be found, to seek to identify additional funding that can be allocated to assist members in that process. There have been no such applications so far for this session. Two such applications were considered in previous sessions.

We understand the nature of the issue and I know that officials are keen to work with members who are still unable, or are struggling, to find appropriate accommodation in order to identify and secure that at the earliest possible date. There is no doubt or debate that that should be possible and that that issue should be resolved.

Scottish Parliament Crèche

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what progress has been made on reopening the Scottish Parliament

crèche.

(S6O-00857)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The Scottish Parliament originally established a crèche to improve public access and engagement for those with young children. In session 2, that service was extended to parliamentary passholders. The crèche closed in March 2020 due to Covid-19 restrictions, and in October 2020 the corporate body agreed to temporarily discontinue the crèche contract due to the on-going pandemic. I am pleased to say that, at a recent SPCB meeting, we agreed that, as the building reopens to the public and as working from home measures are eased, we will immediately procure a new crèche contract.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

As the corporate body is aware, in the past the Parliament has celebrated the provision of a high-quality crèche service in the building, which allows parents and carers to access parliamentary business and to meet more easily with members of the Scottish Parliament

. In October 2020, the SPCB committed to having a new contract in place as soon as possible at the start of the new parliamentary session. What steps are being taken to speed up that process, including consulting not just members but constituents, in the interests of supporting wider engagement with the Parliament?

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I recognise the value of the crèche—I used it when my daughter was pre-school—and I recognise how important it is for visitors and constituents. We have consulted passholders in the Parliament, and I thank everybody who responded to the survey. The procurement process will take around 12 months, but anything that we can do to shorten that process and get the crèche open as soon as possible, we will do.

Ventilation in Constituency Offices

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will provide an update on whether it will support MSPs to install ventilation solutions in their constituency offices with funding outwith the office cost provision. (S6O-00859)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Apologies, Presiding Officer—

I have realised that I am slightly behind in my notes.

SPCB staff have held a drop-in session on ventilation guidance and offered a one-to-one consultation to look at each local office’s circumstances and provide recommendations to improve ventilation where it is needed. So far, 12 offices have been provided with recommendations and a simple specification to help them discuss ventilation with their landlord, who may well be an appropriate route to underwrite the funding of any alteration, but also, if required, to seek two quotes for the work. Three offices have so far provided quotes to officials.

A deadline of 31 March has been set for the return of quotations from local offices. The SPCB will then consider whether additional support is needed for ventilation solutions in local offices or whether such costs can be met within the current office cost provision limits of the members’ expenses scheme. However, we would quite like to see the scope of the particular requirements before finally deciding on that point.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I confirm that I am one of the three who have got quotes and sent them back in. I know that every single office will be different and will have a different set of requirements. I ask the SPCB to be as timeous as possible when it takes the decision on the matter at some point post 31 March, so that any installation that can, and needs to, take place can happen as quickly as possible to help protect staff and any constituent who comes into the office.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I can give that assurance. We understand that many MSPs have constituency offices that are in fact shop units. It is normally regarded as ventilation if the door opens and shuts, because it is a shop. Obviously, when the space is used as a constituency office, the door is not opening and closing in that way, so we appreciate that ventilation issues accrue.

If members who are pursuing those opportunities can ensure that they have two quotations so that we have an idea of the scale of the demand, we will respond as quickly as we can to facilitate the introduction of appropriate ventilation measures.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 6 has been withdrawn.

Policy on Party Affiliation in Publications

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will consider amending its policy on party identity or affiliation appearing on publications paid for by the SPCB. (S6O-00854)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Publications that are funded from parliamentary resources must be factual and relate to the member’s work as a parliamentarian and must not be party political in nature. Therefore, the SPCB’s policy on members’ publications and the policy on the use of the Scottish Parliament corporate identity by MSPs do not permit the use of political party logos or emblems on parliamentary-funded publications, which

helps to ensure that parliamentary-funded publications remain non-party political in nature and are not confused in any way with party-funded political publications.

However, under the policy, members can include their party affiliation in the format that is laid out in the policy—member of the Scottish Parliament for X constituency or Y region, followed by their party in brackets. There are no plans to review the policy at this time. That dispensation is not granted to MPs, for example.

Members’ publications are for many an essential means of communication—they certainly are in my case, in the absence of any local newspaper—and the one opportunity that there is to communicate with all constituents. For them to be seen to be compromised in a party-political way would undermine public confidence and trust, and there would be calls, which would be much more difficult to withstand, for us to end the ability of MSPs to send out annual reports.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

I agree with the member completely, but there seems to be some confusion, because, when I put my report in this time, the “Conservative” title was taken out and was not allowed to go through by the officials.

I wonder whether that could be looked at again and absolute clarity given, particularly for regional MSPs. I think that about 40 or 50 people responded to me saying, “Which political party are you from?” It would be helpful for them to know which party the seven regional MSPs come from. If that could be clarified and some information could be sent to regional MSPs, I would be grateful.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I will certainly take that issue back. Some members are particularly canny in identifying their party-political affiliations, because their leaflet is bright yellow, blue, red or green, and that gives it away slightly.

Notwithstanding that, it is absolutely the case that all MSPs should be able, within the context of the annual report, to identify the region or constituency that they represent, followed by the party affiliation in brackets. I do not know why that would not have been allowed in that instance and I am happy to take that experience back to officials to get some understanding as to what might have happened.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

With apologies to those members whom I was not able to call, that concludes SPCB question time. Before we move to the next item of business, I will allow a short pause for members on the front benches to change places.

Constitution, External Affairs and Culture

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We will be tight for time over the course of the afternoon, so we will press on to the next item of business, which is questions on the portfolio of constitution, external affairs and culture. Members who wish to ask a supplementary question should press the request-to-speak button or type R in the chat function during the relevant question.

I call question 1. [

Interruption

.]

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

I am sorry for being late, Presiding Officer.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

What you lose in Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body questions, you gain back very quickly in constitution questions.

Platinum Jubilee (Support for Communities and Organisations)

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what support it is offering communities and organisations across Scotland to mark the Queen’s platinum jubilee. (S6O-00838)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I am delighted to hear the question. The Queen’s platinum jubilee is a significant milestone and the Scottish Government welcomes the celebrations that will take place across the country throughout this special year.

Jubilee celebrations are commonly community led and Scottish Government officials are ensuring that lord lieutenants, community councils and local authorities are informed of opportunities to be involved in the celebrations.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that the United Kingdom Government has funded the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee fund 2022 and, crucially, that £70,000 has been earmarked for Scottish Borders Council. What specific support is the Scottish Government offering to local communities, local authorities and charities, to help their celebrations of that magnificent milestone in Her Majesty the Queen’s reign?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Scottish Government officials are working with Her Majesty’s personal representatives in Scotland, the lord lieutenants, to promote the community-led events that are so much a part of the historical celebrations of royal jubilees. We are also engaged with the Queen’s Green Canopy, via our executive agency, Forest and Land Scotland. I would be delighted to hear about anything particular that is planned for Scottish Borders Council, as well as any suggestions about how those particular projects can be further supported.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 2 was not lodged.

Independence Referendum Bill (Legal Advice)

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any legal advice it has sought for its proposed independence referendum bill. (S6O-00840)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

It is the long-established convention of this and previous Governments that legal advice is not disclosed, other than in exceptional circumstances. That reflects the public interest in the provision of free and frank legal advice and maintains the right to confidentiality of communications between legal advisers and clients.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I have a very specific supplementary question. I am not asking for the content of any legal advice, but I am asking whether the Scottish Government has taken legal advice—internally or externally, from the Lord Advocate or any lawyer—on the question whether its proposed independence referendum is within the legislative competence of this Parliament. Can he answer yes or no?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I will rest on the answer that I previously gave to the learned gentleman, who, as a member of the Faculty of Advocates, is well aware of custom and practice in relation to the convention on legal advice. I will not depart from that tradition today, although I am grateful for the opportunity that he gave me to do so.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There are two brief supplementaries on the legal advice.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that, if members of the Opposition are so keen to discuss the on-going preparatory work for an independence referendum, they should join us in calling on the United Kingdom Government to honour the democratic mandate granted by the Scottish people, so that an open and fully-informed dialogue on the opportunities of independence can begin as soon as possible?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Cabinet secretary, that question was not directly related to the legal advice, so please give a brief response.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I agree; and I welcome the point raised by my colleague. Seventy-two of the 129 MSPs elected to the chamber were elected on manifestos that commit them, and this Parliament and Government, to holding a referendum on Scottish independence during this parliamentary session. The Bute House agreement reached between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Green Party confirms and strengthens that clear mandate. It would be disappointing if democratically elected members of this or any other Parliament sought to undermine the democratically expressed wish of the electorate in elections, as was cast last year.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

It is extraordinary that the cabinet secretary cannot even acknowledge whether he has sought advice—not what that advice is, but whether he has even asked for that advice. I think that the Parliament deserves to know whether the Government has done its due diligence and carried out all the right preparations on a legal basis. I am not asking what that advice is, but whether he has even bothered to ask. Will he give us an answer? Has he asked for and has he received advice?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Forgive me—I do not know whether Willie Rennie came into portfolio question time without having heard my earlier answer, because it has not changed. Rather than reading out the question that he wrote before arriving, perhaps he could have listened to the answer that I gave earlier. I rest by it.

Proposed Legislation

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

4. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will ensure that any proposed legislation in the constitution, external affairs and culture portfolio is brought forward in a fair and transparent manner. (S6O-00841)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

All legislation that the Government brings forward will continue to be of the highest standard and open to the full scrutiny of the Parliament.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Unfortunately, that response and the responses that he gave to my colleague Donald Cameron and to Willie Rennie strike at the very heart of fairness and transparency and suggest that what he says is not the case. If the cabinet secretary is to maintain the ridiculous position that, in his own Government’s words, it is

“not in the public interest”

for the people of Scotland to know about even the existence of advice on the legality of its proposals, it is clear that secrecy has trumped transparency. I will give the cabinet secretary another opportunity to answer. Has the Scottish Government taken legal advice on its plans for another referendum? If he still refuses to say, will he at least tell us whether it will spend taxpayers’ money defending and trying to hide that information from the public this time around, as it did in 2013?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

It is a curious thing that we now have a third member who did not listen to the answer to the question—[

Interruption

.]

Forgive me, Presiding Officer. Give me a moment so that I can answer the question in exactly the same way as I already have. With your indulgence, it reads as follows:

It is the long-established convention of this and previous Governments that legal advice is not disclosed, other than in exceptional circumstances.—[

Interruption

.]

Instead of barracking, members on the Conservative benches should listen to the answer, having asked for one.

That reflects the public interest in the provision of free and frank legal advice and maintains the right to confidentiality of communications between legal advisers and clients.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you. There is a supplementary from Kenneth Gibson.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that Tory MSPs should be more concerned about the abysmal record of their own party and UK party leader? In the past three years alone, that has included illegally proroguing the Westminster Parliament, breaking procurement regulations—

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. As much as I enjoy Kenny Gibson’s interventions on these sorts of things, surely they should be relevant to the question that was asked.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Gibson was in the middle of his question. I am sure that he will tie it back in to the substance of the relevant question. Mr Gibson, you may continue.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Do you wish me to start the question again?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I wish you to tie it in to the question to which this is a supplementary, Mr Gibson.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

—breaking procurement regulations by handing out PPE manufacturing contracts to unsuitable companies at inflated prices and breaking Covid regulations, all without any transparency.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Yes, I agree.

What with the shifting sands of explaining parties in Downing Street, the unknown costs of their union unit—or, as it is now called, the Union Strategy Committee—which are buried within a headline figure of £81 million, and the courts finding their Covid contracts going to party supporters “unlawful”, the lack of interest of Conservative members appears to follow that old adage of, “Do as we say, not as we do.” As is so often the case, the double standards of the Tories help to make the case for independence.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Questions 5 and 6 are grouped.

Ukraine (Support and Aid)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made on identifying support and aid that it can provide for people in Ukraine and Ukrainians leaving their country and seeking refuge. (S6O-00842)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We have provided £4 million in humanitarian aid as part of global humanitarian efforts: £1 million has been allocated to the British Red Cross and the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund; £2 million has been allocated via the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal that has been launched in Scotland; and £1 million has been allocated to UNICEF to focus on protecting children.

Our first donation of medical supplies arrived in Poland on Thursday. The second donation, which left Scotland on Friday, included more than 130,000 items of medical supplies. I was fortunate enough to be able to see that shipment leave Eurocentral. I thank everyone who helped to turn that around so quickly.

We continue to press the United Kingdom Government to waive visa requirements for Ukrainian nationals and to offer immediate refuge and sanctuary for those who may be displaced. Today’s Home Office announcement does not go far enough. Scotland is ready to offer a warm welcome to people who are fleeing Ukraine.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I thank the minister for that update. Today’s Home Office announcement of a streamlined virtual visa application process for Ukrainians is positive, but does the minister agree that what we really need is a fundamental shift by the UK Government to change the rules, not just the processes? Ukrainians still have to apply for visas.

We have many seasonal workers in Scotland, who cannot even bring direct family here. A massive humanitarian crisis is faced by millions of Europeans, and the Home Office’s response has been poor and pitiful. Does the minister agree that the people of Scotland expect to help and that the Ukrainians who seek shelter deserve so much better?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Yes, I do. I support the passionate way in which Fiona Hyslop made her case. The UK Government’s response has been an international embarrassment. The UK’s offer to Ukrainians is not a refugee route, but a bureaucratic family immigration route that is leaving thousands out in the cold—literally—queueing outside visa application centres.

Progress is being made, but waiving visa requirements and introducing a comprehensive settlement programme would resolve the issues, if only there were the political will to do so. There seems to be no one, apart from the Home Secretary, who does not see the need for more urgent action.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 6 comes from Mark Griffin, who joins us remotely.

Ukrainian Refugees (Accommodation)

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what work it has undertaken with its partners, and funding it has identified, to accommodate refugees from Ukraine. (S6O-00843)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Scotland has a proud history of welcoming refugees and people seeking sanctuary from war and violence. The Scottish Government and Scotland’s local authorities have made it clear to the United Kingdom Government that we stand ready to offer refuge and sanctuary, where necessary, for those who may be displaced. We are therefore working with the Home Office, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, local authorities and other partners to provide people with the safety and security that they need to rebuild their lives.

The UK Government’s current proposals to support Ukrainian refugees via community sponsorship routes are insufficient, and we are still waiting for full details of how that will work. We continue to urge the UK Government to develop a comprehensive resettlement programme to ensure that Ukrainian citizens can be provided with the safety and security that they need to rebuild their lives.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

The glacial response of the UK Government has been absolutely appalling. Yesterday, the Scottish Government’s Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government said:

“we are working at pace to ensure that we stand ready to receive people”.—[

Official Report

, 9 March 2022; c 25.]

Given that the Home Office has finally said that it will ease entry requirements—although it is clear that it is not easing them far enough—can the minister confirm that accommodation and homes are being booked, capacity in schools has been identified and funding is ready so that we can welcome Ukrainians into communities here, as it is clear that we cannot wait for the UK Government to develop a resettlement programme?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Mark Griffin is absolutely right: the glacial pace at which things have been moving is desperate; it is an international embarrassment.

I can confirm that we are working on all the aspects that he raises as potential routes to ensuring that we can provide safe, secure, long-term and sustainable sanctuary to people who are fleeing Putin’s war in Ukraine.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There are two brief supplementary questions on the topic.

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a serving councillor in East Ayrshire.

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has added the voice of Scotland’s local authorities to that of the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament in calling on the Home Secretary to step up the United Kingdom’s resettlement programme for Ukrainian refugees, citing the expertise of Scotland’s strategic migration partnership in supporting refugees and migrants and integrating them into our communities.

Notwithstanding today’s announcement about digital visas, will the minister comment on the Home Secretary’s claim that the UK is “doing everything possible” to speed up the remarkably slow roll-out of the visa scheme to Ukrainian refugees, especially in light of the full willingness of COSLA and our councils to play their part in Europe-wide efforts?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

For “doing everything possible”, read “doing the least that they feel they can get away with”. We continue to call on the UK Government to urgently develop a proper resettlement programme. One reason why the Syrian resettlement programme was successful was that it was a comprehensive one in which partnerships worked to support people in need. I am proud that all 32 Scottish local authorities participated in the programme, welcoming more than 3,300 refugees into their communities. People in families were able to settle and make Scotland their home.

I want to see that again. Therefore, it is vital that rapid, safe and legal routes be established immediately and that the millions fleeing war are given sanctuary through such programmes. Scotland stands ready to offer a warm welcome and a refuge to those who need a home.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I commend to the minister the discussion that the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee had this morning. Some excellent suggestions were made, particularly about gearing up not only our councils but the voluntary sector to support people who come to Scotland for a raft of reasons.

Will the minister commit to working with our business community and public sector partners to support fundraising for the Disasters Emergency Committee, to enable donations to be made? Will he also commit to developing work visas so that Ukrainian people who have skills and talents can come to work in Scotland?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I agree with Sarah Boyack. She has given me the opportunity to, once again, thank the people of Scotland for their incredibly generous support to the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal. More than £10 million has been raised in Scotland. That ensures that we are quickly and effectively getting financial aid to where it is needed.

Regarding how we can support people who arrive in Scotland, as I said to Mark Griffin, we are working across all areas of society to ensure that we have a co-ordinated response that will give people a safe and secure place to call home when they arrive in Scotland.

Peace Institute

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making towards the establishment of a peace institute by the end of 2022, as set out in its 2021-22 programme for government. (S6O-00844)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Following an open tender process in January, we have contracted a consortium of expert researchers to help inform our thinking on Scotland’s future peace offer, which will report back to us in the summer. There has never been a more pertinent time to discuss Scotland’s approach to peace and reconciliation.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

The Scottish Government has committed to establishing a peace institute, with a focus on human rights, by the end of this year. Amnesty International recently published a report into Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians. It includes a

“call on states to immediately suspend the direct and indirect supply, sale or transfer”

of arms to Israel. Given the human rights abuses that Palestinians face, will the Scottish Government’s peace institute have the scope to review the almost £10 million given by Scottish Enterprise in grants to arms companies that sell weapons to Israel?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I welcome the input of members from all parties on particular issues or causes, or about areas in which Scotland’s peace institute could play a meaningful role. I commend the member—and anyone else who is involved—for becoming involved in that process as we consider the form that a peace institute might take. I encourage the member to get in touch about any issues that she, or colleagues, feel should be considered as we make preparations to stand up the planned peace institute.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that the example set by our northern European neighbours, such as Norway, illustrates the positive diplomatic influence that nations of Scotland’s size and character can have in promoting peace on the world stage?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Norway is home to the Peace Research Institute Oslo, which explores peaceful relations between states, groups and peoples. Our research will consider the Norwegian approach and those of other nations to help us to determine Scotland’s distinct peace offer.

Like other nations of its size, Scotland has a wealth of soft power resources—in other words, assets that make us an attractive and trustworthy partner. The Scottish Government recognises that a good international reputation is produced by the country as a whole, and we will continue to collaborate with others to promote Scotland and our values on the international stage.

Scene Stirling (United Kingdom City of Culture 2025)

Dean Lockhart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what support it provided to Scene Stirling and other organisations as they prepared Stirling’s bid to be UK city of culture in 2025. (S6O-00845)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I

congratulate Stirling on reaching the current stage in the competition. We expect the shortlist to be announced around the end of the month. Officials met the Stirling bid team to offer support and help to make connections with relevant partners. Additionally, officials worked closely with VisitScotland and Creative Scotland, which sit on the bid working and steering groups and provided input to the bid proposal. Scene Stirling, which is Stirling’s place partnership programme, is jointly funded by Creative Scotland and Stirling Council. It recently received a further £50,000 from Creative Scotland to build on its successful partnership work.