Scottish Parliament, 26 May 2022

310 contributions from 63 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Women’s Safety (Public Transport)

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the consultation with women and women’s organisations regarding their safety while using the public transport system. (S6O-01142)

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

Women and girls deserve to travel in safety on Scotland’s public transport system. That is why, earlier this year, I committed to undertake a consultation on women’s safety across our public transport network. That will include working with national and local organisations that represent the interests of a cross-section of women in society, as well as with groups that represent female staff who work on the public transport network.

Options to take forward the work will be further informed by discussions with women’s groups and organisations, trade union partners and wider stakeholders. That includes discussions with Engender, which I will be meeting in a couple of weeks, and the British Transport Police, which I met recently.

Once the scope of the work and the options as to how best to consult women on this sensitive issue are agreed, I will provide an update on how we will take forward our programme of engagement and the timescales around that.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Last year, there were 46 sexual assaults against women on Scotland’s railways, which was the highest number in a decade, and 301 women were unacceptably threatened, harassed or commonly assaulted. However, that is just the tip of the iceberg; the figure is likely to be much higher because the gender of the victim was not known in more than 2,500 incidents. Those figures are sickening. Every day, women are fearful that they will be victimised in a train carriage or on a station platform. What urgent action will the Scottish Government take now to ensure that women can travel safely on public transport?

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

More generally in relation to women’s safety on public transport, as the member alluded, there are data gaps. We know that that is because women are far more likely not to report sexual harassment when it happens and that, if they do report it, it is likely to be after the event. To that end, I have instructed my officials to take forward a programme of analysis, which will allow for better data collection in Scotland while recognising that the pandemic has impacted women’s experiences of public transport.

Given that it is a sensitive topic, it is vital that the scope of the work is right. This morning, I spoke to the Scottish Rail Holdings Ltd board about it. I am keen to work with the board, and I recognise that the work will also have potential benefits for staff safety, which the member alluded to. I also look forward to addressing the Women in Rail conference next month and hearing from women who work on our railways about their experiences.

Following my meeting with Engender, I would be more than happy to meet the member t

o discuss any suggestions that she might have to ensure that the consultation is conducted as appropriately as possible, so that we have the data to improve women’s experiences across the public transport network.

ScotRail (Proposed Cuts)

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reported concerns by the Scottish division of the train drivers union, the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen, regarding proposals to make further cuts to ScotRail services. (S6O-01143)

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

ScotRail’s temporary timetable has been implemented as a result of the on-going impact of ASLEF drivers choosing, as is their right, not to make themselves available for overtime or rest-day working.

The timetable is temporary and is delivering about two thirds of the planned May services. The difficult decision to implement it was made to give people certainty when they travel, and ScotRail has looked at how best to provide as much of that as it can during this challenging period for passengers.

Clearly, we all want a return to a much fuller timetable, which is why I am pleased to see ASLEF and ScotRail back around the negotiating table this week.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Another day, another inadequate answer from the minister on this issue, which is affecting our communities across every part of Scotland. The cuts are having enormous consequences in the lives of everyday Scots who depend on rail services to get to work, attend appointments and access childcare.

In a letter from ASLEF to the First Minister, Kevin Lindsay has called on the Government to get back round the negotiating table, and I appreciate that the minister has said that that will happen. Will the minister confirm that the Government will negotiate in good faith on the key issue of driver recruitment? ASLEF has said that 130 drivers need to be recruited in order to staff our railways safely? Will the minister and the First Minister get around the table in good faith to ensure that we end the negative cuts that are having such an impact on people across Scotland?

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

I remind the member that this is an industrial dispute. There are, of course, a number of other industrial disputes between railway unions and other administrations. For example, in London, where Labour is in power, there is a dispute in relation to challenges on the network. Regarding the member’s question as to whether I will be in the room, it would not be appropriate for the minister to be in the negotiating room. It is for ScotRail, as the employer, to be in the room with the trade unions to reach a negotiated settlement. ScotRail will, of course, continue to negotiate in good faith.

I am delighted that ASLEF and ScotRail met on Tuesday, and they will meet again later today to reach a settlement. It is important to remember that the shortages are causing real challenges for passengers across the network. The timetable has been introduced because of an industrial dispute, whereby drivers are choosing, as is their right, not to work on their rest days. I respect that, but it means that ScotRail has to run a limited service. [

Interruption

.] We want to reach a resolution in a timely fashion. I am absolutely committed to working with our trade unions, which I have spent a lot of time with since my appointment, back in January, to ensure that public ownership is a success for our railways and that we re-establish the previous timetable to allow passengers to travel more freely.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Is it appropriate for the member to ask a question and then heckle the minister when she is trying to answer the question that he has asked?

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr Gibson. I remind Mr Gibson that I am chairing the meeting.

I reiterate my call for succinct questions and responses. At the pace that we are going at, we will not be able to get in all members who have a question.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Clearly, it is a long time since Labour was in power, and its members take quite a simplistic view on some of these issues.

Can the minister assure us that the Government will be acting as peacemaker and will maintain a good relationship with both management and unions?

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

Absolutely. The revised timetable in Scotland is temporary, as I have said, and the arrangements will be kept under review—ScotRail will review them next week. It is meeting ASLEF this afternoon, and I am hopeful of a positive resolution.

The Government supports fair work, the principle and practice of trade unions and the right of people to join a trade union. We remain absolutely committed to partnership working, and we have a strong desire to resolve the dispute through negotiation and compromise. That stands in stark comparison with the approach of the United Kingdom Government, with its recent threats to introduce new anti-strike legislation.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Throughout the week, the minister seems to have forgotten that the buck stops with her. She refers to talks today between ScotRail and ASLEF. What has she instructed ScotRail to do, exactly?

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

I assure Mr Simpson that I have not forgotten that the buck stops with me.

In relation to the action that I have taken, I have been meeting ScotRail representatives regularly for updates on how the timetable has been working, and to ensure that we have appropriate carriage allocation across the country. Right now, we are running a limited service—at about 70 per cent of the usual service. We need to ensure that we have appropriate carriage allocation. I raised that with ScotRail last Friday and again yesterday, and I will be speaking with ScotRail again today about carriage allocation more generally.

The other action that I have taken is to ask ScotRail to consider reintroducing a number of services. More information on that will be forthcoming from ScotRail later today, I hope, or on Friday. [

Interruption

.] No, I cannot tell the member, who is heckling me from a sedentary position. I am not here today to inform the member of additional services that ScotRail will be running, because ScotRail is the train operator; I am the Minister for Transport. Mr Simpson needs to recognise the difference between the two—I do not drive the trains.

I have been meeting repeatedly with ScotRail to improve the service that is delivered—

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, minister.

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

I remind the member that we are in this situation because of an industrial dispute between ASLEF and ScotRail, the employer. I invite him to reflect on his Government’s reputation in relation to how the Conservatives deal with trade unions.

Rail Services (Driver Shortages)

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what impact driver shortages will have on the availability of rail services for passengers in Mid Scotland and Fife. (S6O-01144)

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

ScotRail’s current timetable, as a result of driver shortages, is temporary and is delivering about two thirds of the previously planned May services that should have resulted from the new timetable this month.

ScotRail has advised that core services in the Mid Scotland and Fife area have been retained to ensure a reliable and regular service, but the last evening trains will be earlier on some routes. ScotRail has advised that trains will be lengthened when needed to reflect capacity and service reduction.

ScotRail will review the temporary timetable next week. In the interim, talks between ASLEF, which is the train drivers union, and ScotRail will take place later today.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The last train that constituents of mine can take to get home to Stirling, Fife or Perth now leaves Edinburgh at 8 o’clock. Not only does that wreak havoc with potential social plans, but it causes real problems for shift workers in the national health service who cannot now take the train to get back from their place of work. My constituents do not want to hear buck passing or excuses; they want the issue to be sorted as soon as possible.

On Sunday morning, the minister’s ministerial colleague Richard Lochhead told the BBC that he expected the issue to be resolved within a couple of months. Is that the Scottish Government’s position? Can we have an assurance that it will take no longer than that to get some degree of normality back to the train services that my constituents depend on?

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

Mr Fraser is right to ask for a degree of normality. I want nothing more than for us to restore the previous timetable that was in place. Passengers, including his constituents, need certainty. It is appropriate, though, that ScotRail, as the employer, meets ASLEF, the trade union, which will happen today, to reach a resolution that allows for the reinstatement of the previous timetable and that brings greater certainty for passengers and the shift workers whom Mr Fraser is very concerned about.

Childcare Sector Omicron Impacts Fund

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

4. To ask the Scottish Government how many early learning and childcare providers, including private providers, received funding from the £9.8 million childcare sector omicron impacts fund that opened for applications in March this year. (S6O-01145)

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

The Scottish Government has made up to £35 million of dedicated financial support available for childcare services since the start of the pandemic, in recognition of the acute impacts on the sustainability of services. That includes the childcare sector omicron impacts fund, which made up to £9.8 million of support available to the sector in the 2021-22 financial year. More than 4,600 grants have been issued to services in the private, third and childminding sectors. The value of the grants available through that fund ranged between £950 and £4,500.

In order to support the long-term sustainability of the childcare sector, the Scottish Government is working with partners to progress the range of actions set out in the financial sustainability health check, including working with Business Gateway to pilot tailored business support offers for all types of childcare provider.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I hope that the minister will join me in celebrating our ELC workers, who are making a huge difference to our children’s lives, day in and day out. As we emerge from the pandemic, can the minister set out how the Scottish Government is supporting our ELC settings to continue to deliver high-quality care for our children?

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I pay tribute, alongside my colleague Rona Mackay, to the role that ELC providers have played across Scotland in ensuring that essential services could continue during the pandemic. They have played a key role in the effort to fight the virus and to support young children and their families over a very difficult time. I say a heartfelt thank you to them.

We continue to engage with partners to identify and better understand what the impacts of Covid-19 have been on young children, families and ELC practitioners, so that we can respond to their needs. In the 2022-23 period, we will invest more than £1 billion through local government to deliver funded ELC, including expanding the provision of 1,140 hours. The Scottish Government is also funding additional graduate-level posts in ELC settings in our most disadvantaged communities across all 32 local authorities, and it is funding the Care Inspectorate to deliver a targeted improvement programme.

ScotRail Services (Cowdenbeath)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to assess the impact of the new ScotRail timetable on passengers in the Cowdenbeath constituency. (S6O-01146)

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

ScotRail’s May 2022 timetable delivered a regular half-hourly service along the Fife coast, with direct services between Edinburgh and Dundee or Perth and a regular half-hourly service between Edinburgh and Cowdenbeath, via Dunfermline, for passengers in the Cowdenbeath constituency.

However, as a result of ScotRail now operating a temporary timetable due to driver shortages, Cowdenbeath constituency passengers will see a reduction in their services. The services via the Fife coast remain half-hourly but will also have to end earlier. I have asked ScotRail to look at the reintroduction of a number of services, where they are able to do so safely, in advance of a formal review of services next week.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

As a regular commuter on Fife rail, the minister will be aware of the concerns that have been raised about the 23 May temporary timetable and the concerns regarding the 15 May non-temporary timetable. Can she confirm that both sets of concerns will now be looked at, further to an urgent review of both timetables by ScotRail, so that rail commuters and businesses in my Cowdenbeath constituency do not bear the brunt?

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

This morning, I travelled through Kirkcaldy, in my own constituency, and into Ms Ewing’s constituency. I know how challenging the temporary timetable is for passengers, and I want to reassure Ms Ewing’s constituents that the timetable is temporary. We need an urgent resolution for not just passengers but staff and the businesses that have, as the member said, already been impacted.

On the new May timetable, which was introduced a week prior to the temporary timetable, ScotRail listened throughout its consultation process. It added around 150 additional services and made changes including the retention of an all-day direct service between Edinburgh and Perth via Kirkcaldy and additional evening services in Fife.

We should remember that patronage is still not back to where it was prior to the pandemic, with many people not yet feeling safe to return to public transport and others choosing to work from home. I expect ScotRail to continue to review the May timetable, once it is reinstated, as it did throughout the pandemic.

What is most important for Ms Ewing’s constituents—and the constituents of members across the chamber, of course—is that we get a resolution between the unions and ScotRail as timeously as possible. I am committed to working with ScotRail to deliver that.

Economic Development (North-east Scotland)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the social impact of economic development in the north-east. (S6O-01147)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government is committed to driving forward economic development activity in the north-east. The national strategy for economic transformation contains bold and ambitious actions to deliver economic prosperity for all of Scotland’s people and places.

The strategy sets out an aim that, by 2032, Scotland’s economy will significantly outperform its performance in the past decade, in terms of economic performance and the tackling of structural economic inequalities. It aims to put people at the heart of an economy that offers opportunities for all to succeed and where everybody—in every community and region of the country—will share in our economic prosperity.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Trickle-down economics and other economic development models

from the previous century do not deliver wellbeing for communities across my region. There is a clear need to better understand the interconnections across different sectors and move away from siloed strategy and policy development.

Can the minister outline how the just transition fund for the north-east and Moray will capitalise, build and sustain community engagement and deliver meaningful social and economic benefits? Can she also outline what more we can do to improve cross-sectoral working—by connecting transport, tourism, planning, culture and so on—to ensure that no community is left behind?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Our 10-year, £500-million just transition fund will accelerate the transition to net zero in the north-east and Moray, create new and exciting opportunities across the region and ensure that no one is left behind. The Minister for Just Transition, Employment and Fair Work has recently completed extensive engagement with more than 200 stakeholders in the north-east and Moray, and he has been clear that the fund must be co-designed.

Our commitment to both sectoral and regional just transition plans will reflect interdependencies and interactions with and between plans, which will ensure the future of industries, beyond carbon-intensive sectors, and that they are brought along on our transition.

In addition, £1 million of the £20 million that will be made available this year will be subject to participatory budgeting to empower communities to have a direct say in how money will be spent in support of a just transition in their local area.

Transmission Network Use of System Charges (Increase)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what its analysis is of the latest transmission charging forecasts from National Grid ESO, in the light of transmission network use of system charges reportedly increasing in Scotland by between 39 and 73 per cent while charges are decreasing in the majority of zones in England. (S6O-01148)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The transmission network use of system charges remain a key barrier to net zero in Scotland. Ofgem’s analysis suggests that by 2040, Scottish renewables and low-carbon generators will be the only ones

to pay a wider TNUOS charge, with all others—including gas generators based elsewhere in Great Britain—being paid credits.

In a net zero world, it is counterproductive in the extreme to care more about where generation is situated than about what type of generation it is. A new approach is needed rather than simple modifications to the existing methodology.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The disparity in approach would mean a 1GW offshore wind project in north-east Scotland paying £36 million a year in charges, compared with a project connecting in southern Wales receiving a £7.9 million subsidy. That difference is equivalent to nearly £10 for every megawatt hour that is generated, putting Scottish projects at significant disadvantage when bidding for contracts for difference.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that National Grid ESO and Ofgem need to recognise the barrier that the charges present to renewable power development in Scotland and that they need to introduce reforms that can support investment across Scotland? Will he advise what discussions have been held with National Grid ESO and Ofgem so that we can accelerate progress to net zero, keep down overall system costs and ensure fair competition when bidding for contracts for difference?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The transmission charging regime must reward developers that are committed to investing in renewable generation. We have repeatedly made that call to the UK Government, because the existing TNUOS scheme discriminates against Scotland-based projects. We have raised the matter with not just the United Kingdom Government but National Grid ESO, with which I discussed the issue just last month. I also discussed the issue again yesterday with the chief executive of Ofgem and called for action in that area.

It is a serious issue that could compromise renewable energy projects in Scotland. It is unacceptable that Scottish projects continue to be discriminated against in this way.

Ferries (Construction Contract)

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. The Scottish Conservatives have repeatedly called for John Swinney to come to Parliament and face scrutiny on the crucial role that he has played in the shambolic ferry contracts. Every time that we have requested—[

Interruption

.] Scottish National Party back benchers do not seem to like this, but just imagine—[

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members! We are just beginning this session of First Minister’s question time, and I would be very grateful if we could hear the question.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Every time that we have asked for a statement, every SNP back bencher and John Swinney have voted against him coming to the Parliament. However, today, he cannot avoid the questions to which islanders and Scottish taxpayers need answers.

John Swinney signed off the ferry contracts that have, so far, cost £250 million and denied islanders the ferries that they need. Will the Deputy First Minister finally tell the Scottish public why he signed off the deals?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I note that I am answering questions today because the First Minister is still unwell with Covid. For many obvious reasons, I wish her a very speedy recovery. [

Applause

.]

I do not think that Douglas Ross is in the strongest position to question my engagement with the Parliament on key issues, because I gave a statement earlier this week, I answered questions last week and I handled a bill the week before. Unlike some Tory MSPs, you will not find me skiving off to the football for a few days when the Parliament is sitting.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

How many jobs have you got, Douglas?

The Presiding Officer

Members! We will have quiet, please.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As a minister, I carry collective responsibilities for the actions of the Scottish Government. The responsibility for agreeing contracts lies with individual portfolios—in this scenario, with transport. My role was to provide the necessary budget for building the ferries. After the final decision was taken, officials briefed me about the contract being awarded and assured me, on the basis of the contract, that the budget that I had approved in August 2015 did not require to be changed.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I know that the Deputy First Minister does not do this very often, but he spoke about a statement that he gave to Parliament and a bill that he took through Parliament, and neither of those has anything to do with ferries, which is what this Parliament has asked to hear from him about. On every occasion, John Swinney has not just refused to speak but voted against himself giving a statement to Parliament.

John Swinney’s fingerprints are all over the deal. Emails show that the Deputy First Minister confirmed that there were “no banana skins”. He was on calls with finance officials, who said that Mr Swinney “now understands the background”. His approval was essential. The contract was only “clear to award” after he signed it off, according to Scottish Government emails.

John Swinney charged ahead despite ferry experts warning against the contract, and despite legal advice that the SNP originally tried to cover up but could not redact properly, warning of the high risk of the contract being challenged and ruled ineffective. The SNP charged ahead despite the contract missing a key safeguard that is an industry standard, and despite the fact that the jobs at Ferguson were already safe and the yard had other options for work. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members! We simply are not going to shout from a sedentary position.

Mr Ross, please continue.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

That just shows how SNP members want to push this under the carpet and for it all to go away. They do not want scrutiny over the quarter of a billion pounds that has been spent without a single ferry that the islanders were promised being produced.

The Government charged ahead, despite there being no agreed design for the ferries, and despite the fact that the Ferguson bid was the most expensive of them all. Can the Deputy First Minister explain to people across Scotland why he approved those deals despite all the evidence that suggested he should not?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I made it clear in my first answer that I carry collective responsibility for the actions of the Government. I therefore accept that those decisions were taken by the Government, but they were taken individually by the transport minister.

I will give Douglas Ross the benefit of the note that he has quoted from, which was from a senior finance official. It said:

“Just finished my call with DFM. He now understands the background and that Mr McKay has cleared the proposal.”

That is the complete sentence that Douglas Ross is missing. The decision had been taken, and I was being briefed that there was no change to the budget that I had already sanctioned. Why is that answer not good enough for Douglas Ross? He has been given that answer on countless occasions.

As for his points about the Government not wishing to undergo scrutiny on this issue, it was looked at by a parliamentary committee, by Audit Scotland and by another parliamentary committee, and it has been the subject of a range of questions at question time. When Douglas Ross looks at all the papers, he will see that the contract arrangement demonstrates that the Government was taking action to deliver ferries for the island communities that require them, and we were taking decisions to protect employment on the lower Clyde. That is a record that this Government is determined to defend.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The Government would have to be pretty determined to defend a record that has not built any ferries and that has left islanders without ferries.

Honest John has missed the second sentence—

The Presiding Officer

Mr Ross, we will desist from using nicknames in the chamber. We will call people by their first names and surnames.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Sorry.

John Swinney read out a sentence from an email, but he refused to read the second sentence, and I wonder why. The second sentence says:

“So the way is clear to award.”

That is the conclusion of the email that reveals the Deputy First Minister’s involvement. It was escalated to the Deputy First Minister on 9 October 2015 at 17:15—[

Interruption

.]

SNP members do not want to hear this, but the email saying that the way to award was clear was sent only after the matter had gone to John Swinney.

Why did the SNP really sign off on this deal? It was not to save jobs, because we know that the jobs were safe. It was not the cheapest deal for taxpayers; it was actually the most expensive. It was not the most secure contract; it was the most risky. It was not backed by experts; they warned the Deputy First Minister and others against it. However, against overwhelming evidence, John Swinney signed off the deal anyway.

It seems obvious to everyone what happened here. The Scottish National Party wanted the political praise for keeping the yard open ahead of an election, so it ignored all the alarm bells. It looks an awful lot like the SNP made a dodgy deal, and now it is trying to cover that up. Can the Deputy First Minister—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Can we please hear Mr Ross’s question?

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The Deputy First Minister is trying to listen, despite some of the comment behind him. Can he really tell the public that there was no political motive behind the award of the contract?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There was no political motive behind the contract. The objective of the Government was to ensure that the ferries that were required would be built, and that is what we are concentrating on achieving. We were also determined to ensure that employment on the lower Clyde was supported with contracts from the CalMac Ferries network. For Mr Ross to say that, somehow, the yard could stay open without any contracts is for him to deny the physical reality of the way in which a yard would be run.

I point out to Mr Ross that Audit Scotland went through the procurement process and indicated that that process, which resulted in Ferguson’s becoming the preferred bidder, was entirely standard. On that basis, the transport minister took the decision to award the contract, and, as the note says about me,

“He now understands the background and that Mr McKay has cleared the proposal.”

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Read the next sentence.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Ross is trying to invent something else. What I have explained to Parliament, consistent with my—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

There continues to be quite a lot of heckling, and I would be very grateful if members could resist the temptation to do so, as I would very much like to hear the Deputy First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Consistent with my obligation under the ministerial code of conduct to give truthful answers to Parliament, I am making it clear to Parliament that the memo that Mr Ross has quoted from was simply recording the fact that I had been briefed about a decision that another minister had taken and that, therefore, the way was clear to award the contract, because I had been briefed, the budget was in place and Mr Mackay’s decision could stand.

Douglas Ross can go around smearing and inventing all the information that he wants, but the people of Scotland will see through his grubby tactics today.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

What the people of Scotland can see is that quarter of a billion pounds of taxpayers’ money has been spent on two ferries that have so far not sailed, which were promised by the Government to the islanders who desperately need them for their connectivity. For the Deputy First Minister to respond in the way that he has done undermines what those communities need right now.

It seems that the ferry deal was the best deal for the SNP, not the best deal for Scotland, and that ScotRail is going the same way for commuters as the ferry deal has gone for islanders. Just a month after the Deputy First Minister’s SNP Government took control of our railways, one in three train services has been cut.

Earlier this week, in a rare move, business groups, including the Scottish Tourism Alliance, Scottish Financial Enterprise, the Scottish Chambers of Commerce, the Scottish Retail Consortium and the Institute of Directors, united to warn of the harsh impact that their members face as a result of the ScotRail cuts. Delays, last-minute cancellations and service reductions are causing real problems for passengers across the country.

Next week, our national men’s team will play its biggest match for more than two decades. The tartan army will need to get to and from Hampden on ScotRail. Will the Deputy First Minister’s Government have got a grip of the situation by then? If not, when can people expect to have the rail service that they need?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

When we look at the specific questions that Douglas Ross has put to me on the Ferguson’s issue, it is abundantly clear why a statement by me to Parliament was unnecessary, because he had nothing of any substance whatsoever to put to me.

I have been a member of the Parliament for a long time. The assessment has often been made that, when a political leader changes the topic of their question during First Minister’s questions, that is an indication that they are in trouble. That is exactly where Douglas Ross is.

Mr Ross knows full well—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members! Please continue, Deputy First Minister. People are following the proceedings and would like to hear them.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Ross knows full well that negotiations are under way between the employer—ScotRail—and the trade unions to resolve the industrial dispute that is limiting services. That dialogue is under way, as it should be.

He asks about the Ukraine match. We obviously want more services to be in place to deal with the Ukraine match. I am confident that ScotRail will have additional services in place to ensure that the specific requirements of access to Hampden will be addressed. Announcements will be made about that in due course.

I suspect—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Mr Ross!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I suspect that the degree of agitation from Mr Ross today is an indication of the depth of the trouble that he is in. I do not think that anything that I say today will satisfy Mr Ross. He is going to doubt what I say and question my integrity. I am giving Parliament honest answers, which is more than can be said for the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, who Douglas Ross is prepared to support.

Rail Services

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. Across the country, thousands of people are being left out of pocket and are struggling with this week’s rail chaos. There are countless examples. I will give the Deputy First Minister one of them.

Leanne lives in Dumbarton and works at a service station in Helensburgh. She takes the train to and from work. There is now no service after 8 pm and she finishes her shift at 10.30 pm. She is unable to drive and no public transport is available. How does the Deputy First Minister expect Leanne and countless others to get home?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I sympathise entirely with the position that Leanne finds herself in. That is why the discussions between the rail trade unions and ScotRail that will take place this afternoon are so important in resolving the issue.

We must operate a safe railway and can do that only with fully and properly trained drivers. The network currently relies on rest day working by ScotRail’s train drivers, which is a practice that we are trying to eliminate. For properly understandable reasons, driver training was interrupted by Covid. More drivers are available now than have been in the past and we are trying to make progress on boosting driver numbers to resolve that issue.

We have to resolve the dispute, and that is what the discussions are about. I encourage ScotRail and the trade unions to reach a conclusion to that process so that individuals such as Leanne can have the rail service that they should have access to.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The Deputy First Minister did not answer the question. Unlike the Deputy First Minister, Leanne does not have a ministerial car to get home. [

Interruption

.] Members can hum and haw all they like, but this is real lived experience for their constituents, too, and they should care about their constituents. In the middle of a cost of living crisis, Leanne has to spend £20 on a taxi. That means that she has to work for two hours just to pay to get home. That is the reality for thousands of people across the country.

Let us look at the facts. At the start of 2020, there were 2,400 rail services a day. In February, the Scottish Government made a permanent cut of 250 services a day. The latest chaos sees that number increased to almost 1,000 services a day being cut.

The message from ScotRail and the Scottish Government is simply that people must make their own arrangements. Normally, when there is a significant disruption in rail services, a replacement bus service is provided. Will the Deputy First Minister tell us how many of the 1,000 services a day that have been cut have a replacement bus service?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Sarwar asked me questions about the capacity of our rail services, and I want to address those points.

If we look back at the situation in 2015, we see that there were 1,086 drivers on the ScotRail network. In December last year, it was 1,168, so there has been growth in the number of drivers. ScotRail would have trained a further 130 drivers had the process not be paused during the pandemic for what were, as I think we all accept, understandable reasons. There is now a pool of almost 900 pending driver applications, which gives us a supply of candidates coming into driver training that will allow us to expand the availability of driving personnel. Indeed, the ScotRail board gave authority for the recruitment of a further 135 drivers to move forward to the next stage.

I put those points on the record to address the capacity of the rail services and show the investment that has been made to ensure that we have adequate numbers of drivers in the future. We are in a period of difficulty just now because drivers are exercising their voluntary right not to undertake rest-day working. We are trying to resolve those issues by the negotiation that is taking place and, through ScotRail, we have put in place an amended timetable that gives more certainty about the availability of services rather than last-minute cancellations. The feedback that we got from Transport Focus showed that that was the most important issue to address for the travelling public so that they had certainty about the transport that was available.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The Deputy First Minister spoke but he did not answer the question. I WhatsApped the ScotRail business account this morning to ask about how many replacement bus services ScotRail had. The answer was:

“Hi there, no, there isn’t.”

There are no replacement services across the country. In the middle of a cost of living and climate crisis, the Scottish National Party-Green Government is leaving people stranded with no public transport and asking them to use gas-guzzling vehicles instead. In practice, that failure means tens of thousands of people struggling to get to and from work, more people being out of pocket and made poorer, millions being lost for local businesses and the industries that suffered much during Covid taking another hit.

While the Deputy First Minister and his colleagues have 28 chauffeur-driven cars that cost more than £1 million to get them to and from their work, the SNP-Green Government is cutting 1,000 rail services a day, offering no replacement bus services and forcing people to work hours just to pay for a taxi home. Should he and every other minister not hand back the keys to the ministerial chauffeur-driven cars until they get that sorted and get Scotland moving again?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

This Government is providing practical help to people with the cost of living. For example, the Scottish Government has doubled the Scottish child payment to £20 per week. It will go up to £25 per week. None of that support is available in any other part of the United Kingdom, including in Labour-run Wales.

The Scottish Government has assisted individuals with council tax support. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We have assisted individuals with direct support through the carers allowance and other measures.

While we are doing all of that to support members of the public in the cost of living crisis that they face, what is the Labour Party doing? It is getting into bed with the Tory party in council administrations around the country. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Anas Sarwar told the country on 5 May:

“don’t reward this toxic, out of touch, corrupt Tory Party with your vote.”

What is the Labour Party now doing? It is rewarding the

“toxic, out of touch, corrupt Tory Party”

with jobs at West Lothian Council and the City of Edinburgh Council. The Labour Party and the Tory party are working together. Vote Labour—get Tory. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

We move to general and constituency supplementaries. [

Interruption

.] Members, until we have silence, I will not proceed to the next question.

Falklands War

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Deputy First Minister will be aware that this year marks the 40th anniversary of the Falklands war, a conflict that claimed the lives of members of the Scots Guards and 45 Commando, which is based in my constituency. Does he share my disappointment that the United Kingdom Government’s Falklands veterans concessionary flight scheme remains suspended, denying holders of the South Atlantic medal, and next of kin, their only realistic chance of visiting the islands at this poignant time?

I understand that the scheme was paused because of the pandemic and that there have been indications that it might resume at some point later this year. Will the Deputy First Minister join me in calling on the UK Government to restart it as a matter of urgency, so that those to whom this anniversary means so much can, if they wish, visit the Falklands and pay their respects to fallen comrades?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is understandable that non-essential travel to the Falklands was suspended in 2020 due to the Covid-19 restrictions, but I very much agree with Mr Dey, who pursued many such issues for some time, as Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans. It is extremely important that the flights resume at the earliest possible and practicable time, especially in this, the 40th anniversary year—I appreciate that that is also the subject of today’s members’ business debate. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans has written to the Secretary of State for Defence to seek clarity on the projected timeline for the resumption of flights and to impress on him the importance of continuing to provide that critical support to veterans of the 1982 conflict.

Census 2022

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

A week before the census deadline, National Records of Scotland announced that only 84.8 per cent of households had filled in the census. In Dundee, almost a fifth of households had not completed it. In Glasgow, the figure was close to a quarter. Last year, the return rate in England and Wales was 97 per cent. With just five days to go, does the Deputy First Minister agree that the census has been a disaster from start to finish, and that it was a mistake to separate the Scottish census from the wider United Kingdom census?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

No, I do not agree with that point. Obviously, a lot of hard work is going on to ensure that the census is completed. In due course, the final returns will be disclosed by National Records of Scotland, which has to undertake some analysis. Arising from that, Angus Robertson, the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, will update the Parliament on the progress of the census and the strength of the information that is available for us to use in the future development of public policy in Scotland.

Nursing and Midwifery (Staffing)

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

On Monday, Julie Lambeth, chair of the Scotland board of the Royal College of Nursing, said that fair pay is needed to stem an exodus of staff and retain younger nurses in our national health service. She also made it clear that, right now, the two priorities for dedicated nursing staff are pay and safe staffing.

Nursing and midwifery vacancies climbed by a shocking 170 per cent between 2020 and 2021, and I have heard at first hand from nurses who have made it clear that the current normalisation of staffing gaps is taking its toll on their mental and physical health. Those are some of the most dedicated and hard-working staff in our NHS, who are leaving the profession that they love, broken.

When will the Government get a grip and engage with the RCN on safe staffing, fair pay and the meaningful workforce planning that has been so desperately lacking?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr O’Kane has raised serious issues. Negotiations are under way on both pay and safe staffing. The Government is engaged in that process as we speak. Within the significant constraints in which we are operating, we are working to ensure that we can address the issues that are of concern to members of the Royal College of Nursing.

I point out to Mr O’Kane that nursing and staffing levels in the national health service are higher than they were when we came to office, and are at record levels. We will continue to support nursing staff in the excellent and outstanding work that they do and on which we all depend.

Electricity Bill (E.ON Energy)

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

A vulnerable constituent, who is a young man with Asperger’s syndrome, rents a small cottage on a farm in Peebles. His predicted electricity bill was £35 per month, but he is actually being billed £1,500 a month. Technicians have advised that he is probably receiving bills from the farm, so he is now sitting with a so-called debt of nearly £4,000. Despite the efforts of my office to get E.ON Energy to respond, and even to get in touch with its chief executive, we have had radio silence. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that, with all the bad publicity surrounding E.ON’s profits and its recommendation that customers should get in touch if they have financial difficulties, that does not inspire confidence?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

On the basis of the information that Christine Grahame has put to me, that is a serious situation. I know Christine Grahame well, and she is an assiduous constituency member of the Parliament. I am absolutely certain that she will pursue E.ON with tremendous energy in order to get answers and engagement, and I encourage that company to engage with her. If there is anything that Government officials can do to assist, I would be happy to arrange for that assistance to be provided.

The case that Christine Grahame has raised is an illustration of the severity of the situation that some individuals in our society will be facing, and they need the support of their members of the Parliament in those circumstances. The Government also funds Advice Direct Scotland to provide free advice, support and assistance to households, and I encourage anyone who needs that assistance to secure it. The scale of energy bills will be a significant problem for individuals in the period that lies ahead.

Bariatric Surgery

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

One in 25 Scots is severely obese, but the backlog in waiting times pre-pandemic has led to Scots, in desperation, flying overseas in increasing numbers for bariatric surgery. One medical tourism organiser has flown around 60 people per month from Scotland to Turkey. However, an alarming number of patients return from overseas surgery with no effective aftercare plan, as I was told by someone who recently returned from Turkey, or they return with complications such as leakage of stomach contents or a hernia.

Will the Deputy First Minister join me in asking patients not to seek weight loss surgery overseas, but instead to wait to be treated in the United Kingdom, where we have the best bariatric surgeons in the world, and where that treatment will include the essential follow-up that is vital for patient safety?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am happy to associate myself with the call that Dr Gulhane has made. I saw some media reports on that subject this morning that highlighted the point that he has made that, although travelling overseas may secure initial treatment at a faster pace, the complications and implications of that are then carried by the National Health Service, and that can be a significant burden for the NHS and for individuals. I whole-heartedly endorse the point that has been made by Dr Gulhane and encourage individuals to follow the advice that he has given to the Parliament.

Fornethy House Residential School (Survivors Campaign)

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

My constituent Marion Reid has come to the Parliament today, along with other survivors of Fornethy House residential school, to highlight their plight. So far, more than 200 brave women have come forward—I suspect that that is the tip of the iceberg—and shared their traumatic, awful experience of physical, mental and sexual abuse at the hands of staff at Fornethy in the 1960s, where young, vulnerable children were sent, supposedly to help them to recover from illness.

Understandably, those women feel that no one is listening to them. The Deputy First Minister has said that he will meet them. Can I ask him to ensure that that meeting takes place urgently? More importantly, will he ensure that he and the Government listen to those women, that no stone is left unturned to get answers for them and that the perpetrators are brought to justice?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There are a couple of different issues in that question.

Mr Smyth’s last point was whether every effort would be made to ensure that perpetrators of abuse are brought to justice. Properly, that is a matter for Police Scotland and the Crown. I endorse the points that Mr Smyth has made about the importance of an approach being taken to bring any perpetrator of abuse to justice, but he will understand that that is a process that is independent of the Government.

The substance of the issue around Fornethy is very sensitive, and I have agreed to meet with a group of survivors, I think in response to a parliamentary question from Monica Lennon. I will do that as soon as it is possible to do so.

I applaud the courage of individuals who have come forward, and I know that their concern is that the redress arrangements that the Parliament has put in place do not automatically include individuals who were in Fornethy for a short period of time, because it is primarily focused on individuals who were abused during long-term care placements.

To Mr Smyth and his constituent I say that there is obviously scope for individuals to apply to Redress Scotland for a redress payment, and each individual’s circumstance will be individually addressed and assessed. It is not the case that there is a prohibition on applications from Fornethy survivors; it is that each individual case will be assessed on its merits.

Again, I will happily see the group, and will do that as soon as I possibly can.

Scottish Bus Week

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

3. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is celebrating Scottish bus week. (S6F-01132)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am pleased to support the first ever Scottish bus week and to celebrate the many environmental, economic and social benefits that buses provide to our communities.

The Scottish Government has put buses at the heart of Scotland’s just transition, funding more than 500 low-carbon buses across Scotland; providing free bus travel for people under 22 and for older and disabled people; and investing more than £500 million in bus priority infrastructure.

I urge all members to join us in supporting Scottish bus week and encourage more people to travel by bus.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

Thanks to the introduction of free bus travel for under 22s, which was delivered with Greens in Government, more than 300,000 young people across Scotland, including 20,000 in the Highlands and Islands, are now enjoying free low-carbon travel.

Here, in the capital, the proposed Scottish National Party-Green Party council coalition agreement included significant measures to increase bus patronage. Is the Deputy First Minister as shocked as I am that, instead of embracing progressive politics, Labour has put those positive measures at risk by colluding with the Tories to cobble together an administration?

Can the Deputy First Minister outline how the Government will work collaboratively to provide quality bus services across Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As a consequence of the partnership that was agreed between the Scottish Green Party and the Scottish Government, young people under the age of 22, rightly, travel free. Because of that agreement, there was an opportunity for other parts of the country to go further in relation to that type of collaboration, and I am only sorry that, in the city of Edinburgh, the Labour Party’s collaboration with the Conservative Party has thwarted further ambitious proposals being brought forward.

We know that all of these grubby deals at a local level have been approved by Jackie Baillie—frankly, that explains a lot about that particular agreement. However, as I said, I very much regret that there was not the opportunity to take forward some of these proposals and to advance the interests of people in Scotland by the collaboration that we have seen in this Parliament.

Food and Drink Prices and Shortages

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

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is, regarding the impact on Scotland, to comments by Ian Wright of the Food and Drink Sector Council regarding the United Kingdom’s preparedness for increasing food prices and shortages. (S6F-01149)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Through Brexit, Covid and, now, the illegal war in Ukraine, we have seen how resilient the food sector is despite all the challenges that it has faced. Food supply continues to be strong. However, the Scottish Government takes seriously the food security of Scotland and, in response to the war in Ukraine, the Scottish Government, together with industry, has established a short-life food security and supply task force.

The task force is currently considering a range of issues, and it will recommend actions that can be taken to strengthen food security and supply in Scotland. I expect the task force to report in due course.

The United Kingdom Government holds many of the levers to address the on-going pressures, but we will continue to use all the powers that we have available to support people in Scotland.

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

Scotland’s food and drink sector has been on a journey that has been marked by numerous successes, not least in providing a constant supply of world-class foods, employing more than 115,000 people and providing a high-value export market. However, it is clear to me that that totemic industry is in grave danger from the incompetence and intransigence of the UK Government, as was highlighted by Mr Wright. That not only endangers our food industry; it threatens the ability of people to source the high-quality food that we want them to have. Does the Deputy First Minister therefore agree that the only way in which we can protect that industry and all our industries is through an independent Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I agree with Mr Fairlie on that point. The food and drink industry is currently facing numerous significant and challenging impacts as a result of the UK Government’s mishandling of Brexit at the time of a pandemic. Those issues are being added to by the challenges that come from the cost of living crisis and the war in Ukraine.

All those issues—the cost of living, the implications of Brexit, the barriers to trade and the obstacles to the free movement of individuals—can be addressed by independence. That is why Mr Fairlie is absolutely right to put that point to Parliament.

Waste Burning

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether burning waste is good for the environment. (S6F-01137)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In considering the treatment of Scotland’s unavoidable and unrecyclable residual waste, there are no options that are good for the environment. That is why we are taking actions to reduce the amount of waste that we produce, to increase the proportion that we recycle and to minimise the impact of treating any remaining residual waste.

We recently published an independent review of the role of incineration in Scotland’s waste hierarchy to ensure that how we treat residual waste is aligned with our net zero ambitions. A key finding of the review was that, although incineration can be less climate damaging than landfill, incineration capacity could outstrip the supply of residual waste if most of the facilities in the pipeline of developments are built.

We will set out our initial response to the review in June.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Residents of Ochiltree are rightly upset by proposals to construct a new incinerator there. A report that was commissioned by one of the First Minister’s ministers, Lorna Slater, who pledged to end the building of new incinerators in her party’s manifesto, says that there is not even enough demand for new facilities. The local Scottish National Party has been embarrassingly silent on the issue, but local residents, politicians and community groups are united in their opposition to the plans. Will the First Minister bring in a moratorium on new incinerators? How does that facility fit into her plans to reach net zero?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will make two points. First, obviously, the individual application that Sharon Dowey referred to is a live planning application, so it would be completely inappropriate for me to comment on it. It is a live planning application with East Ayrshire Council, which might explain why local politicians are silent on the issue, as well. If they were not silent on it, they would be in breach of their code of conduct. We should all be mindful of the rules under which we are all supposed to operate.

My second point relates to the strategic question of incineration. In my earlier answer, I indicated that we have sought expert advice on that question. We have received that, and we are very grateful to Dr Colin Church for the review. That is being considered within Government, and ministers will give a response in June.

The point that I made in my original answer about the risk that, if all the developments that are being proposed were consented, we would end up with more capacity than would be justifiable with the level of residual waste is, obviously, a factor that has to be considered as part of the exercise in reviewing the whole question of incineration. Ministers will respond to Parliament on that in advance of the summer recess.

Cost of Living

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to comments by Citizens Advice Scotland that one in five people are running out of money before payday. (S6F-01144)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The United Kingdom cost of living crisis is impacting all households, with those on the lowest incomes being hardest hit. It is shocking and shameful that, week after week, the UK Government has refused to take the direct and bold action that is required to support households in need. We await the statement that is being made in the House of Commons today.

We have repeatedly urged the UK Government to use the levers that it has, including by introducing a windfall tax, cutting VAT on energy bills, increasing the warm home discount, and following our lead in uprating benefits.

In contrast, this Government is investing almost £770 million this year through a package of cost of living measures and social security support that is not available anywhere else in the UK, and it is investing £12 million to support free advice services.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Currently, 20 per cent of people cannot make it to payday, and, with the energy price cap set to soar this October to almost £3,000 as well as exorbitant inflation, even more people are facing impossible demands on household budgets. The mental health toll will be huge.

One of the Scottish Government’s responses was to give a £150 council tax discount to Scottish households. However, Chris Birt of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation said recently:

“£150 will barely touch the sides of the gaping hole in many low-income households’ budgets”.

He added:

“There was no perfect solution available to the Finance Secretary, but this isn’t a good one”.

In addition to what the chancellor will announce today—I agree with John Swinney that it is something that the Tories have been forced into—I must ask this Government what steps it will take to be bolder. What new plans will it have to play its part in ensuring that struggling households can look to this Government for the support that they need?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

One of the measures that this Government has taken has been to double the Scottish child payment to £20 per child per week. We are increasing it to £25 from the end of the year, and we will extend it to under-16s. That is not provided in any other part of the United Kingdom.

I remind Parliament that that measure was voted against by the Labour Party, because it voted against the budget. Much as I respect Pauline McNeill, I have to say to those in the Labour Party that, if they are going to come to Parliament and demand that we do things, the nice and decent thing would be to vote for those things when we put them to Parliament.

Secondly, yes, we will await what the chancellor says or is saying—I am not sure whether he is speaking at this precise moment. However, instead of complaining about what the UK Government is or is not doing, why do we not have the powers in this Parliament to take the actions that will remedy the situation?

Lastly, it also comes down to the decisions that are taken by individual public authorities in Scotland. Yesterday, in my own council area, in Perth and Kinross, we removed the Conservatives from power and a Scottish National Party administration was appointed. Its first act—its first policy—was to apply £700,000 of new money in cost of living measures to support my vulnerable constituents. What was the first act of some Labour authorities around the country? It was to give new jobs to the Tories—that is a disgrace for the Labour Party.

The Presiding Officer

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

Falkland Islands

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I ask members and those in the public gallery who are leaving to do so as quickly and quietly as possible.

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-04082, in the name of Sharon Dowey, on marking the 40th anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland Islands. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament marks the 40th anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland Islands in 1982; notes that the anniversary is recognised as a national holiday in the Falklands; recognises all the brave sacrifices made by the British military personnel, their families and the British public throughout this 74-day war; celebrates what it sees as the unity demonstrated by UK citizens in a time of great need to restore freedom for the people in the Falklands; highlights what it considers are the strong cultural links between Scotland and the Falkland community and recognises the significant contribution that members of the Armed Forces from Scotland made to liberating the Islands in 1982; commemorates the lives of the three civilian Falkland Islanders and 255 British military personnel that were sadly lost, as well as the hundreds that were injured; notes the significant role that many civilians reportedly played in supporting the Task Force on its campaign in the South Atlantic; further notes the support that it believes the UK Government continues to provide to the Falklands’ right to self-determination and their wish to remain a UK Overseas Territory; expresses its support for veterans on both sides and Islanders who it understands still struggle with mental and physical scars as a consequence of the events that they have experienced or witnessed; acknowledges the year-long programme of different honouring and celebratory events across the world that aim to commemorate the sacrifices made in 1982; values the Falkland Islands as what it considers a forward-looking community with a strong sense of culture and heritage, and celebrates what it sees as the great progress made in the Falkland Islands since 1982.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

It is my pleasure to bring this debate to the Scottish Parliament to mark 40 years since the end of the Falklands war. The war lasted 74 days and resulted in the loss of 907 lives—three islanders, 255 British personnel and 649 Argentine soldiers. The citizens of both Britain and the Falkland Islands owe a huge debt to those who lost their lives. They were defending liberty, democracy and the right to self-determination, not to mention Falkland Islanders’ right and desire to remain British. They did that in the face of a foreign aggressor—something that feels particularly relevant today—travelling to a distant land 8,000 miles away “across an angry sea”, as one soldier put it. It was a plunge into the unknown to defend a people they had never met and, in many cases, knew little about.

That is truly admirable and something that we can appreciate collectively as a Parliament. Their conduct is a shining example of the very best of the British armed forces. They acted with professionalism, ruthlessness, skill and compassion to bring freedom back to the Falklands.

Last week, I had the honour of hosting a reception in the Scottish Parliament along with Richard Hyslop, the Falkland Islands representative in the United Kingdom and Europe. After the speeches, Richard played a short video made by schoolchildren in the Falklands, in which they expressed their thanks to those who fought for their freedom. It was a touching tribute that affected many of us who were present. The comment that stuck me most was the one that was made at the end by a wee girl, who said, “Thank you for keeping us British. Things would not have been the same without you.” It was a reminder that those who fought and gave their lives laid the foundations for the Falklands of today, and their sacrifice has not been forgotten.

The video also showed that the Falklands is a changing place and not the 1982 time capsule that remains in many British minds. For most people, thinking of the Falklands conjures up grainy photographs of marines in cagoules crossing a foreboding landscape of penguins waddling on beaches, or perhaps the liberation of Stanley in the war’s final days. Few people in 1982 could have foreseen the dramatic changes that have swept this small but significant territory over the past 40 years.

It was clear from my conversations with Falkland Islanders that they have prospered only since the war’s conclusion. Both Richard Hyslop and his deputy, Michael Betts, were eager to tell me about the exciting developments that are taking place in Stanley. There has been a huge increase in tourism, not to mention that its booming economy is the envy of South America. If we were to take a walk through Stanley today, perhaps along Thatcher Drive, we would see new houses going up, more fishing boats in the harbour and the development of a distinct Falkland Islands culture—Britishness with a Latin twist, with their own favourite national sports and food, namely Falklands squid and lamb. The Stanley of 1982 is now, for many, just a memory, just as the war thankfully is, too, but we must preserve those memories. We owe that much to those who fought and lost their lives in defence of freedom.

Given more time, it would have been good to delve into the rich connections between Scotland and the Falkland Islands, or the Scottish role in the British response, whether it was the merchant navy sailors or members of the Special Air Service, but I suspect that others will touch on that in their contributions.

Before I end, I thank those who came to the reception that I mentioned earlier: representatives from the South Atlantic Medal Association 1982 and the Lothian Veterans Centre; representatives of the British Army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force; and not forgetting the governor of Edinburgh castle, Alastair Bruce, and members of the Royal British Legion. In addition, Poppyscotland was a great help in organising the event.

It was fascinating to talk to Ian Gardiner, a veteran from 45 Commando Royal Marines, who went on to become an author and military expert, and who writes vividly about his experiences during the war, particularly in the battle of Two Sisters, the fierce night battle that took place 1,000ft above Stanley.

It would not have been a Falklands event without the presence of a strong contingent of islanders. It was great to invite to the Scottish Parliament members of Falkland Wool Growers, the chief islander of Tristan Da Cunha and students from the Falklands who are studying in Scotland, and to learn more about island life from them at first hand. We had speeches from Richard Hyslop, whom I have already mentioned, and from Keith Brown MSP, who has the honour of being the only parliamentarian who served during the conflict—in his case, with the Royal Marines. He spoke memorably about his experiences during the war and of friends lost and battles fought—things that few of us in the chamber will ever know.

I thank the MSPs from across the political spectrum who attended the event. It is fair to say that, despite our differences, we all saw how much British identity means to the people of the Falklands, which was touching. What is more, we can all respect the sacrifice that was made 40 years ago, which has ensured that Falkland Islanders have remained free from foreign rule to this day.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, Ms Dowey. It is always good to hear of events that are well attended by islanders.

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

I sincerely thank Sharon Dowey for securing the debate. I, too, wish to commemorate all the lives that were lost and those who were injured both physically and mentally, including British troops, civilians and Argentinians.

I also recognise the professionalism and courage of our armed forces. As well as three Falkland Islanders, in total, 904 military personnel were killed in the conflict. Of those, 255 were British military personnel, and 649 were Argentines. British forces reported that 775 were wounded in the war, with 115 being captured between April and June. Meanwhile, 1,657 were reported wounded among Argentina’s military personnel, and more than 11,000 were captured.

I will go back 40 years, because, for me, those people might not have lost their lives or been injured. Before a shot had been fired, pretty well none of us knew where the Falklands were or what the UK Government had to do with it. As I travelled on the bus to my law studies, I recall how horrified I was to hear passengers in front of me cheering that we should “bash the Argies”.

As we came to learn more, we found out that there had been an incursion on the island by metal workers with some Argentinian marines, who raised the Argentinian flag, which raised the alert. The island was thousands of miles from our shores and had a population in the low thousands. The islanders were not British citizens—citizenship was granted to them only after the war. Of course, I shared the concerns for their wellbeing and safety, but I know that I was not alone in having grave concerns about launching into a war. The country was not united in the decision to attack, nor in the way in which the war was conducted.

There was, I believe, an opportunity to resolve the dispute over the sovereignty of the Falklands by diplomacy. It might have failed, but it was not given enough time and space.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Would Christine Grahame accept that the UK Government at the time made strenuous efforts through the United Nations to reach an accommodation, and that it made all sorts of proposals for joint sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, which were rejected by the Argentinian Government?

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

We disagree about that, but I will talk about the press coverage at the time and how the press behaved.

The sinking of the General Belgrano, an ageing Argentinian cruiser, caused the loss of 323 Argentinian lives on 2 May 1982, after it was attacked as it sailed either to or out of the 200-mile exclusion zone. I do not know the ins and outs of what was correct, but the matter is certainly still disputed. There was retaliation two days later, of course, with an attack on HMS Sheffield, which was sunk off the coast of the Falkland Islands, killing 20 men. There was no going back after that.

I recall—before even one British ship had sailed—the increasingly feverish warmongering, which was fuelled, in particular, by a circulation war between

The Sun

and the

Mirror

.

The Sun

had a bloodthirsty stance from the start, which included inviting readers to sponsor Sidewinder missiles and offering free “Sink the Argies” computer games. It never relented.

The Sun

splashed with the poster front page, “We’ll Smash ‘Em”, printed over pictures of Winston Churchill and a bulldog. Finally, there was the infamous “Gotcha”.

The Sun

became increasingly frustrated with politicians who were attempting to negotiate a settlement—I agreed with them—to avoid a “shooting war”, as it was called. At one point, the US Secretary of State, Al Haig, was accused of

“standing in the way of war”

because of his efforts to avoid bloodshed. The paper even urged the Government to reject an offer of peace talks from the Argentine military regime, with the headline “Stick it up your junta”, which became its catchphrase for the war.

Not all the press was like that, of course, but, for good measure,

The Sun

described the BBC and the “pygmy”

Guardian

as

“traitors in our midst”. The

Mirror

was a “timorous, whining newspaper”. The

Mirror

retaliated by saying that

The Sun

had

“fallen from the gutter into the sewer”.

That language worried me at the time. I was worried about how we were considering the dangers, in particular the dangers that we were putting our troops into in war. Very few politicians have experienced the front line of war, excluding my colleague Keith Brown. Those who speak about it speak very differently of conflict, including at Westminster, and I always listen to them.

Dr Johnson, in seeking to prevent an earlier Falklands conflict, said:

“It is wonderful with what coolness and indifference the greater part of mankind see war commenced. Those that hear of it at a distance, or read of it in books, but have never presented its evils to their minds, consider it as little more than a splendid game”.

I return to the lives lost and damaged. They must not be forgotten—I have not forgotten them—but I have also not forgotten how the loss of those lives might have been prevented, with intelligence and diplomacy being tried first and tested to its limits before putting our armed forces into conflict. Some 1,000 died, and thousands more were injured. We owe it to them and their descendants, and to our armed forces today, to exhaust every diplomatic international avenue before ever resorting to the brutality of war.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I congratulate Sharon Dowey on securing this debate on what is a very important anniversary. I join her and other members in recognising and remembering the lives lost—the British servicemen who were lost, the civilians lost and the Argentinians who were lost, as many of them were conscript soldiers who had no particular appetite for the conflict but were forced into it by an evil military junta that was trying to divert away from its domestic problems by invading British sovereign territory.

I had the privilege of visiting the Falkland Islands in 2012, on the 30th anniversary of the liberation, along with Keith Brown, and Christina McKelvie was there as well. It was a fascinating and, at times, a very moving visit. I had the great honour of laying a wreath in memory of the cook Brian Easton from Alyth in Perthshire, who had served on HMS Glamorgan and was killed on 12 June 1982 when that ship was hit by an Argentinian missile. He was 24 years old. I know that his former colleagues appreciated that gesture that I was able to perform.

Like other members, I have my own memories of the Falklands conflict. I was sitting my highers at the time—I was 16 years old. Mr Carson is nodding—he is obviously of a similar vintage. Against the backdrop of sitting my highers, I well remember the news reports coming through daily, first about the sailing of the task force and then about the conflict in the Falklands. To this day, names such as Goose Green, San Carlos and Bluff Cove are still resonant in my memory from that time. As it did for many people of my generation, the Falklands conflict had a substantial impact on the formation of my political opinions—not least my view of the leadership of Margaret Thatcher and her Government at that time.

A number of myths have grown up around the conflict. Christine Grahame made some fair points, but I think that she overstated the enthusiasm for war that existed in the UK Government then. We must remember that Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet was predominantly made up of middle-aged men who had themselves known war—they had fought in the second world war—and they were not enthusiasts for it at all. The then UK Government made enormous efforts to reach an accommodation with the Argentinians, through the United Nations.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

We can disagree about how the diplomacy was conducted, but on that point would Murdo Fraser concede that the actions of the UK Government before that point—for example, in taking away HMS Endurance and other steps that sent entirely the wrong message to the Argentinians—resulted in the honourable resignation of Lord Carrington?

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will not disagree with Keith Brown; he makes a very fair point. However, he and others should also recognise that there was no gung-ho attitude in the UK Government at the time. It was desperate to try to avoid conflict—not least because of the substantial risks of sending a task force thousands of miles away to the south Atlantic, with no idea as to whether that mission would be successful.

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

Will the member take an intervention?

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

If I have time.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I can give you the time back, Mr Fraser.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will give way.

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

In fairness, I think that Murdo Fraser will concede that I was describing the gung-ho attitude of a particular tabloid newspaper, which gave me concern about how the public then began to own such an attitude.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am grateful to Christine Grahame for that clarification, and I recognise the point that she makes. However, although strenuous efforts were made to arrive at a diplomatic settlement, those were resisted by the Argentinians, which left armed conflict as the only way to resolve the matter.

I will conclude, Presiding Officer, as I have probably taken up too much time already. I encourage others who have not been to the Falkland Islands to make the visit. Today, they have a vibrant economy and society, as Sharon Dowey has pointed out, and as a tourist destination they are growing enormously. Visitors can see wildlife; historic sites linked with the conflict of 40 years ago; and penguins in large numbers—those are always a delight. I hope that we will continue to see the Falklands economy growing and thriving, thanks to the sacrifice that was made by our soldiers, airmen and sailors 40 years ago. We should continue to recognise their memory.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I very much welcome the debate, and I congratulate Sharon Dowey on securing it.

The fact that the Falklands conflict occurred 40 years ago means that, for many, it is history. However, a survey that was carried out by the charity Help for Heroes reminds us that a quarter of respondents aged between 18 and 24 had never heard of the conflict; nearly one in two of those aged between 18 and 34 did not know in which decade it took place; and 11 per cent thought that it was the UK rather than Argentina that had invaded the Falklands. Therefore, although it is important that the debate should go on the record and that we should express our solidarity with the Falkland Islanders, it is also important to learn lessons for the future.

For me, the conflict was marked by the fact that the UK was led by Margaret Thatcher, with whom I disagreed profoundly on almost every topic that we could mention. However, the earlier exchange between Christine Grahame, Murdo Fraser and Keith Brown shows what is important in the debate, because we are a democracy and we can have such discussions and look back on history without any of us being put at risk. We can also see the importance in a democracy of having peace making and diplomacy as well as armed forces.

It is important for us to celebrate the fact that the people of the Falkland Islands, who have strong links with the UK—and Scotland, in particular—were united in wanting to retain those links and their UK characteristics. They relied on our armed forces to restore their freedom.

An important part of Sharon Dowey’s motion is that we need to express our support for those who lost their lives on both sides of the conflict, whether they were from Argentina or our own armed forces. The people who were injured also had to deal with the aftermath of the conflict. A veteran of the Falkland war said that “not a day goes by” when he does not think about his experience of the conflict and about those who were badly burned when his ship was sunk by Argentine jets 40 years ago. For many people, the aftermath lives on today.

We also need to celebrate our links with the Falkland Islands—Scotland’s links, in particular. I thank Michael Betts, the deputy representative for the Falkland Islands Government, for meeting me last week. It was good to reflect on the similarities between Scotland and the Falkland Islands. As I mentioned, those include the fact that Scotland has islands, a similar topography and weather, lots of wind power, sheep farming and climate-proofed homes. Sheep are important to the Falkland Islands community, and the community is looking to get recognition to brand its wool as Falklands wool, because it is of excellent quality and is organic.

There are also important similarities relating to climate change. The Falkland Islands have high wind and solar power generation, like Scotland, because they do not have an alternative due to their location.

There are links between the Falkland Islands and universities in Scotland and the rest of the UK. There is also a reliance on the state because of the size of the country; people have an expectation of provision from the state. They get support to go on holiday, they have a very good welfare system and they have funded university and living fees to enable them to come to the UK to study—the vast majority of people return home.

It is important that we reflect on the achievements of the Falkland Islanders and on our links to them. We have strong links through the work of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and our British islands and Mediterranean region branch.

I started by saying that 40 years was a long time ago and that, for many, the conflict is history, but it is important that we continue to try to improve the relationship between the UK and the Falkland Islands’ nearest neighbour, Argentina. It is critical that respect for the Falkland Islanders is at the heart of that relationship and that we continue our support. Wars are expensive, both financially and because they cost lives.

As we look to the future, let us consider this as a unique opportunity to welcome support and recognise the sacrifices that were made 40 years ago as well as to celebrate our cultural links, work together to share our expertise and academic links and continue exploration of best practice between our countries and people. Let us look at how we can continue to strengthen the link between Scotland and the rest of the UK, and the Falkland Islands.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak today. I congratulate my colleague Sharon Dowey on bringing the debate to the chamber.

Not only was the invasion and occupation of the Falkland Islands by Argentine forces on Friday 2 April 1982 a horrific and illegal act, but it marked a significant turning point for the then UK Government, and it was a test for the then Prime Minister’s leadership and Government.

A British naval task force was sent to reclaim the Falkland Islands, but assembling that force was no simple task.

Amassing defence for the islands—which are 8,000 miles from the UK, in the south Atlantic—whether by sea or air, was going to involve logistics and planning of epic proportions.

The 26 ships—a number that later rose to 44—of the Royal Navy that took an active part in the campaign were supported by 22 ships of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. They included six specialist logistical landing ships, two ships from the Royal Maritime Auxiliary Service and 54 requisitioned vessels. Many of those civilian ships had to be fitted with extra equipment for the long voyage, including helicopter landing decks, specialist communications apparatus and water-treatment plants. In addition, the cruise liner SS Uganda was requisitioned and converted to serve as a hospital ship.

As well as sea-borne capabilities, we needed air superiority, which was a monumental task to achieve. Although the air tasks were clear, the assets that we needed were not clear at all. Even from the base on Ascension Island, there were no aircraft that could fly to the Falklands and back. Therefore, air-to-air refuelling had to take place, including as part of operation Black Buck, which was the famous op involving Vulcan bombers from RAF Waddington that thwarted Argentina’s ability to fly over Port Stanley. One aircraft had to be refuelled by air 17 times over a period of 15 hours and 45 minutes.

Such a short speech does not do justice to the significance of the operations that took place, nor can it come close to acknowledging the significant contributions that were made by so many military and civilian personnel. We have already heard about the loss of 255 British servicemen, including 15 personnel from Arbroath-based 45 Commando and the second battalion of the Scots Guards, plus three individuals from the Falklands, who were included in the more than 900 lives that were lost in total. The British success in the war came about chiefly due to our ability to project and sustain a task force in an impromptu military campaign for which there was no prior planning.

As we know, Argentine forces surrendered on 14 June 1982, which is a date that has gone down in history. It is known in the Falkland Islands as liberation day, and it is a national holiday. As the Falkland Islands Government has said, Falkland Islanders are profoundly grateful for the strong support that the UK Government continues to provide in acknowledging their choice to remain a UK overseas territory. The people of the Falkland Islands continue to be forward looking, with a strong sense of culture and heritage.

The immense bravery and fortitude that was shown by the Falkland Islanders and armed forces personnel amid the harsh terrain and conditions of the conflict should never be underestimated and should be universally commended.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I thank Sharon Dowey

for securing this members’ business debate to mark the 40th anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland Islands.

I also thank Sharon Dowey for her sponsorship of last week’s 40th anniversary commemoration event in the Parliament, which was a fitting way for us to reflect on the impact and legacy of the Falklands conflict. When I tried to mention all the MSPs who were in attendance that night, I missed out two. I am happy to rectify that now by mentioning them by name—they were Pam Gosal and Tess White.

I also mentioned by name someone who was not there—Murdo Fraser. I do not know where he was that night. [

Laughter

.] However, I seized on the fact that he came down to the Falkland Islands in 2012, as Christina McKelvie and I did. It was a fantastic opportunity to see a place that is remarkable, and not just for the conflict that took place there.

What is clear from the speeches that we have heard is that, across the chamber, we are unanimous in recognising the bravery and heroism of all the individuals who set sail to free the islands.

I was interested in Murdo Fraser’s speech, in particular, because he talked about a young man who died on 12 June on HMS Glamorgan. As it happens, it was the night between 11 and 12 June when my unit, which is pronounced “four-five Commando” rather than “forty-five Commando”—there is no explanation; that is just what it is known as—conducted an attack. The person next to me directed fire from HMS Glamorgan from our position. That scared me endlessly; I thought that it required an act of faith for somebody to know exactly how far we were advancing and be able to direct fire with that kind of accuracy. It just shows how skilful and brave the people on the Glamorgan were. I send my full condolences to the surviving family of the young man whom Murdo Fraser mentioned.

As we near the 40th anniversary, there are a number of upcoming events and activities that will provide us all with a chance to consider the lasting impact of the conflict.

I am glad that a number of members have mentioned the Argentinians who were involved. It has been said that many of them were not there by choice. The ones whom I met were young men. One had a suitcase. Why would someone take a suitcase to war? He did so because he had no way of carrying proper equipment, so he took civilian clothes. He seemed to me to be younger even than we were. They were hopelessly ill-prepared, and they were hungry and cold. The one prisoner whom I took back to our headquarters was absolutely petrified.

Also, I have to say that one of the major achievements of the Falklands war—for me, at least—was that I saw no ill treatment whatsoever of any Argentinian prisoners of war. In my experience, they were treated exceptionally well, which is a mark of a very professional force, in my view.

I will be delighted to attend the Scottish national event in Edinburgh on 18 June, which is being delivered by the Scottish Government in partnership with Legion Scotland and Poppyscotland. It will provide the people of Scotland with an opportunity to commemorate an important and poignant anniversary. I encourage MSPs of all parties to come, if they can, and in turn to encourage others to come along on that day.

To coincide with that event, Poppyscotland—this relates to Sarah Boyack’s point—is delivering a wider learning programme and package of resources to schools across the country to allow young people to learn more about the conflict. It will also highlight the role of the armed forces, including the role that they play today and how we can support service members and their families.

It is interesting to think that, back in 1982, we were closer to the end of the second world war than we are today to the Falklands conflict. Speaking for myself, in 1982 I thought that world war two was ancient history, so you can imagine how it feels now to be thinking back to the Falklands.

I also look forward to attending the Royal British Legion’s national event at the National Memorial Arboretum to mark the official anniversary.

I would like to take a moment to highlight the work by Andrew Cave to ensure that the efforts of dockyard workers, who worked skilfully and tirelessly to ensure that our personnel and fleet were ready to sail to the Falklands, were properly recognised and commemorated, with plaques being placed in current and former naval dockyards around the world, including just across the Forth River, in Rosyth. It is only right that we pay tribute to those often-forgotten individuals, along with everyone else who made a contribution during the conflict—from the serving personnel to their families and their wider communities. I was scheduled to go to an event at Rosyth when the plaque commemorating those workers and the work of Andrew Cave would be unveiled but, unfortunately, I contracted Covid earlier that week.

We should also take a moment to recognise and appreciate something that we heard last week, which Sharon Dowey will remember, about the strong cultural links that Scotland shares with the Falkland Islands communities to this day. Many people in the islands’ population are descended from Scottish and Welsh immigrants who settled in the territory after 1833. Many individuals from the Shetland and Orkney islands emigrated to the Falkland Islands in the second half of the 19th century, during the development of its sheep-breeding industry.

To turn back briefly to the war and its lasting impact, I note that the war involved all elements of the armed forces and lasted just 74 days. As we have heard, it claimed the lives of hundreds of servicemen and had a lasting impact on thousands more, as well as on their families. Many veterans still struggle with physical and mental scars or have faced hardships in the years afterwards.

I will briefly mention the four men in my troop who were killed: Pete Fitton, Andy Uren, Bob Leeming and Keith Phillips. As I mentioned last week, Bob Leeming was a sergeant with a wife and a family; he had children at home. Keith Phillips, who was the same age as me, and had the same first name, was killed just before the attack on Two Sisters. For him, life was finished there. When we went down to the Falklands in 2012, Murdo Fraser made a call

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Thank you very much indeed, cabinet secretary. That concludes the debate. I suspend the meeting until 2 pm.

13:26 Meeting suspended.

14:00 On resuming—

Constitution, External Affairs and Culture

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The next item of business is portfolio question time and the portfolio is constitution, external affairs and culture. If a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button or enter the letter R in the chat function during the relevant question. I again call for succinct questions, and answers to match, so that we can get in as many members as possible.

Scotland’s Census 2022

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on Scotland

’

s census 2022. (S6O-01134)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

As of this morning, the return rate stands at 85.7 per cent, with the enumeration of 2,238,784 households. That is an increase of 6.5 percentage points since the start of the extension period, on 1 May, and it amounts to 144,431 extra households being enumerated. The geographical return rate is also encouraging, with 25 of Scotland’s 32 local authorities passing the 85 per cent milestone, and a further five passing 80 per cent.

Field Force enumerators continue to visit households that are yet to complete the 2022 census. So far, 1.59 million households have been visited and offered help to complete the census, either online or with a paper copy. That work continues.

The number of households yet to return their census form stands at 373,701. All have been written to a number of times, and the majority have had a visit from enumerators. In recent days, a final reminder communication has been sent to all those households.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It is evident that the census will not achieve the uptake levels that are necessary for it to be successful. Before the census, National Records of Scotland said that there must be a person response rate of at least 94 per cent, and it is clear that that will not now be achieved. Especially worrying is the situation in Glasgow, our largest city. Why has the Scottish National Party Government got this so badly wrong? Does the cabinet secretary see merit in an independent inquiry into this shambles?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I am delighted to be able to confirm to Donald Cameron that the most significant increase in response during the census extension period has been in the city of Glasgow, and more work is under way.

I encourage Donald Cameron and all other members, now that they have the opportunity and the public’s ear, to encourage everybody to take part. Householders have until the end of May to submit their census return. Our absolute priority is to support and enable those who have not yet done so to complete their census return, adding to the more than 2.2 million households across Scotland that have already done so. For those who have yet to complete their census return, help and support is available via the website, census.gov.scot, or by calling the free helpline on 0800 030 8308. The field teams, who have carried out more than 1.5 million doorstep visits, will continue to support people to complete their census returns.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I will not be alone in having been impressed with the extent of the promotional campaign for the census in the preceding months. What further targeted campaigning has taken place since the strategic decision was made to extend the census deadline to the end of May?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Throughout the census collection extension period, a range of work has been undertaken to increase the return rate. The marketing campaign was extended, with updated messaging informing people about the extension and reminding them of the legal requirement to fill in the census. That updated messaging was featured across television, radio and the press. Updated digital and outdoor adverts were targeted at local authorities with lower return rates to encourage completion, while media partnerships have been created to increase return rates among young people who live away from home. Field events have taken place across the country to support people to complete their census return, with events being held at places of worship, universities, colleges, supermarkets, libraries and leisure centres. Those events will continue this week and into the weekend.

In addition, a quarter of a million postcards and more than 400,000 reminder letters have been sent to households that have not yet completed their census return.

Listed Buildings (Consultation)

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government how Historic Environment Scotland ensures that communities are adequately consulted when considering whether a building should be listed. (S6O-01135)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Questions regarding day-to-day operational matters relating to Historic Environment Scotland’s designation process are best answered directly by Historic Environment Scotland. However, I can confirm that, when HES assesses applications for designations, community engagement is a key part of the assessment. It does not make such decisions behind closed doors. It consults parties that are directly affected, including owners, occupiers and local planning authorities, and it welcomes views from members of the public through its historic environment portal.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

A number of constituents have contacted me in despair at the news that Historic Environment Scotland is currently considering whether Cumbernauld town centre should be a listed building. Just when it looked as though plans to redevelop the site were progressing and there was an opportunity to replace the current town centre with something fit for a town the size of Cumbernauld, the HES proposal threatens those plans.

Can the minister assure me and my constituents that Historic Environment Scotland will not approve a proposal to list such an awful building if that will put at risk plans to develop a modern and accessible town centre?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank Gillian Mackay for her and her constituents’ interest, and for bringing the issue to the chamber’s attention. I note that our colleague Jamie Hepburn has similarly had a lot of correspondence on the issue and is as engaged with it as Gillian Mackay is.

I understand the strength of feeling that exists in Cumbernauld and the way in which Gillian Mackay has articulated the situation. However, the Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014 delegated the responsibility for compiling or approving lists of buildings of special architectural or historical interest to Historic Environment Scotland, and appeals against decisions by HES to list buildings are made to the Scottish ministers. As ministers may have a future role in the decision-making process, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the merits of any proposed listing.

That said, I ask Gillian Mackay to note that a building’s being listed does not necessarily prevent development or alteration. I encourage Gillian Mackay, colleagues and constituents to engage with Historic Environment Scotland in the process.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

When I met

Historic Environment Scotland in March, it informed me that 200 sites across Scotland are shut or have restricted access. How does HES intend to fund any reconstruction work on sites that require further intervention?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I have regularly engaged with the management of

Historic Environment Scotland on the high-level masonry issues that there are at sites across Scotland. The issue that Sharon Dowey raises is slightly tangential to the subject of the listing process but, as part of my regular engagement with HES, I have visited Linlithgow palace, Dumbarton castle and Arbroath abbey in order to see for myself the work that is already being done. I am hopeful that the process of assessment can be carried out as quickly as possible, so that visitors to Historic Environment Scotland sites, along with staff, can enjoy those sites safely, as we would all expect them to be able to do.

Northern Ireland Protocol

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the potential impact on Scotland of the UK Government’s reported plans to unilaterally change the Northern Ireland protocol. (S6O-01136)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government has made its views clear to the UK Government. We are deeply concerned about the UK Government’s plans to override the protocol unilaterally and the catastrophic damage that that could cause to Scotland. Kate Forbes and I have written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Foreign Secretary, respectively, calling on the UK Government to re-engage constructively with our European Union partners. We have received no reply, and we have had no meaningful discussions with the UK Government on the matter.

The UK Government’s threats to breach an international treaty that was signed in good faith just two years ago could spark a trade war that would have disastrous economic consequences for Scotland and for all parts of the UK. For the UK Government to even contemplate such reckless action in the midst of a cost of living crisis is unthinkable and indefensible.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

If the UK Government will not listen to the Scottish Government, the Irish Government, the First Minister designate of Northern Ireland, the European Commission and many, many more who would suffer in a Tory-made UK-EU war, does the cabinet secretary believe that the UK Government might instead listen to the US House of Representatives, which, in a joint statement with the European Parliament last weekend, concluded that

“renegotiating the Protocol is not an option. Only joint solutions will work.”?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The deterioration of the dispute over the Northern Ireland protocol, such that it necessitates intervention by Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and Richard Neal, the leader of the US congressional delegation visiting Europe this week, is a grave cause for concern. The prospect of a trade deal between the UK and the United States will recede rapidly if the UK Government maintains its reckless attitude to negotiation with the European Union.

Far from identifying the benefits of Brexit, the UK Government seems determined to seize upon every imaginable harm that can be extracted from Brexit. We can only hope that the UK Government will, indeed, listen to our US partners, pull back from its irresponsible threats and focus instead on dialogue with our EU partners and on finding a durable agreed solution.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Last April, the First Minister claimed that the Northern Ireland protocol was a template for an independent Scotland in the EU; last week, she warned that it could trigger a trade war with the EU and tip the UK into recession. What is the Government’s view this week?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I do not think that Willie Rennie understands what the Northern Ireland protocol is. We are talking about the UK Government breaching the Northern Ireland protocol. Having said that the deal was “oven-ready” and that it was a fantastic deal, the UK Government is unilaterally threatening to break international law. I am surprised that Willie Rennie does not know that—he should know it. There is a world of difference between that and a Northern Ireland protocol that was agreed by both sides and could be workable if the UK Government was prepared to live up to its international treaty obligations.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 4 was not lodged.

Ukrainian Refugees (Settlement)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

5. To ask the Scottish Government how its supersponsor scheme takes account of the preferences of Ukrainian refugees regarding settlement locations within Scotland. (S6O-01138)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The supersponsor scheme is designed to provide a quick and safe route to enable people displaced from Ukraine to come to a place of sanctuary by removing the need for applicants to be matched to an individual sponsor prior to being given permission to travel to the United Kingdom.

Once people have arrived, a national matching service, delivered by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, will match those settling here with longer-term accommodation across Scotland. Displaced people from Ukraine are asked to complete a short questionnaire that captures key information and preferences. That information is then used to find suitable longer-term accommodation, which will be offered as a choice.

All 32 of our local authorities are taking part in the programme and hosts have offered up their homes right across the country. The national matching service will ensure that people are offered settlement opportunities across Scotland, recognising that people will have different preferences and that available housing is limited in some authorities.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

There is growing concern that what seems to be an overly bureaucratic system has been put in place. It seems that the Syria and Afghanistan resettlement scheme that was adopted in the 32 local council areas is now being administered to Ukrainian refugees.

I understand that 1,000 Ukrainians are currently living in hotels and have had no clarification of the matching process for the scheme. What consideration is being given to a single scheme that can be delivered without councils having to decide? What advice is being given to councils to ensure that the scheme is speeded up?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I absolutely agree with Miles Briggs’s last point. We need a process that moves as quickly as possible. I am working with officials and local authority partners to ensure that people are allocated and matched to longer term accommodation and that the necessary safeguarding checks are carried out as quickly as possible—that applies to both the properties on offer and the individuals offering them, as I am sure that Miles Briggs would expect.

I do not recognise the numbers that Miles Briggs has quoted, but I would be happy to meet him to discuss the matching process to ensure that we are able to offer people sustainable long-term accommodation as quickly as possible. That will relieve the undoubted pressures that exist in places such as Edinburgh, which Miles Briggs represents and which has become a national hub for arrivals, so that the system flows well.

Ukrainian Refugees (Services)

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what services the £10,500 tariff provided by the United Kingdom Government for local authorities to support displaced Ukrainians arriving in Scotland is expected to cover. (S6O-01139)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The £10,500 tariff is designed to support local authorities to meet all their associated costs, including those for providing education; advice and referrals to specialist public health services, including mental health services and adult social care; support to access employability support and social security; homelessness assistance; and community integration through the provision of translation services, community events and signposting to further support.

The tariff is paid per person but only for those who have settled under the homes for Ukraine scheme, which includes the supersponsor scheme, not for those under the family sponsorship scheme. The £200 emergency payment for guests is also paid from that one payment.

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

In addition to the costs that the minister mentioned, there are health costs, which do not appear to be covered. The tariff does not seem enough to cover what services will be required to spend and it is ridiculous to hear from the minister that no money is made available for people who are settling in Scotland under the family sponsorship scheme. Does he agree that the tariff is not adequate, that the United Kingdom Government should increase it so that local authorities are suitably reimbursed and that it should be for all displaced Ukrainians, no matter what scheme they arrive through?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I absolutely agree. The tariff is not adequate for the support that our public services will provide as we support displaced people from Ukraine, nor is there specific additional funding for national health service services—a point that I have repeatedly made to UK ministers.

There is no funding at all for people who arrive under the family sponsorship scheme, which is clearly not acceptable. Our local authorities and public services will support people regardless of the route by which they arrive and funding must be provided for them to do that, which is a point that I will raise with UK ministers again, with the support of Welsh colleagues, in trilateral meetings this afternoon.

I have repeatedly called for the UK Government to provide parity of funding, to consider the resources that are needed to fund public services and to provide clarity on how long they will be available for. In the meantime, the Scottish Government has provided local authorities with significant funding support in addition to the UK Government funding to allow them to quickly make accommodation available for people who require longer-term support.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

Is the Scottish Government giving specialised support and aid to disabled Ukrainians, similar to that which is being given in Northern Ireland?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

All people arriving from Ukraine will have full access to NHS services and social security on the same basis as people who ordinarily live in Scotland. That means that people fleeing the war in Ukraine will have access to any support that they need in our health service as well as immediate access to social security benefits such as the child and adult disability payments. In addition, a public protection response has been adopted across Scotland to ensure that vulnerable people who are displaced from Ukraine are protected and have access to the same support and safeguards as any other vulnerable person under Scottish jurisdiction.

Ukrainian Refugees (Welcome Hubs)

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the work of Scotland’s welcome hubs for Ukrainian refugees. (S6O-01140)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Welcome hubs have been established at key entry points: Edinburgh airport, Glasgow city and airport and Cairnryan port. They continue to provide support from healthcare to translation services, clothes and food to temporary accommodation, and trauma support. Multi-agency teams at our welcome hubs have triaged more than 1,500 people to date and are assessing people’s needs on arrival. They are a single point where we can triage and support people.

We are continually working with our national and local partners, including local government and the Scottish Refugee Council, to improve and streamline our approach. I thank everyone involved in our welcome hubs for the incredible work that they do.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Not all arrivals pass through the welcome hubs, which are the point of contact for arrivals and offer them support such as language support, healthcare, food and clothing. What steps are being taken to ensure that new arrivals who do not use the welcome hubs are not neglected and are supported in the way that those who go through the hubs are?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank Alexander Stewart for the important point that he made. It is absolutely the case that the Scottish Government is working with our local authority partners to provide support and services for all arrivals from Ukraine. Multi-agency teams working in the hubs are ready to provide support from healthcare to translation, as I set out. We remain focused on providing a safe and secure place to address any immediate wellbeing and safeguarding needs for displaced persons and will continue to do so.

If there are particular issues from the region that he represents regarding making sure that proper contact is made, I would be happy to ensure that they are taken up with the local authorities.

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

Staff at Scotland’s welcome hubs are becoming more experienced by the day as they assist in triaging displaced people from Ukraine. Will the minister assure the Parliament that those hubs will continue to be supported in that triaging role, allowing a warm Scots welcome to be afforded to all displaced Ukrainians who arrive in Scotland?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Yes, absolutely, and I thank Alasdair Allan for giving me the opportunity to thank the teams in our welcome hubs. They have moved at pace and have needed to work on an increasing scale in order to meet the needs of those who arrive from Ukraine. That is very much appreciated by the Scottish Government, the people of Scotland and the people who have arrived from Ukraine.

It has been fed back to me that having that warm Scottish welcome has been very much appreciated, and we will continue to support that approach so that the people who arrive get the sanctuary and support that they need and deserve.

Ukrainian Refugees (Risk to Female Refugees)

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what analysis it has carried out of the specific risk to female refugees who are fleeing Ukraine to resettle in Scotland. (S6O-01141)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Anyone who meets the United Kingdom Government eligibility criteria can apply to sponsor a displaced person through the homes for Ukraine scheme. That means that safeguarding risks are inherent in the system, as I and the Welsh Government have raised on a number of occasions with UK ministers, whom I have urged to replicate the supersponsor schemes of our Governments.

The supersponsor scheme means that disclosure checks are done in advance of guests being placed with hosts. We also have guidance that supports all the operational partners that are involved in safeguarding to identify and respond to the risks to and needs of displaced people from Ukraine.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Active safeguarding is extremely important, and I understand that

t

he Trafficking Awareness Raising Alliance and JustRight Scotland have produced a leaflet in Ukrainian and Russian to explain to women the risks of trafficking. In recognition of the fact that vulnerability can increase over time, will the Scottish Government consider including partnerships and services on violence against women and girls in the response at both strategic and operational levels, and commit to carrying out gender-specific risk and safety planning, not just at entry but in the medium and long term?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank Ruth Maguire, particularly in her role as co-convener of the cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation, for her question, and I will happily consider the suggestions that she has made.

The safeguarding measures that we have put in place are imperative to ensuring that we are able to provide the necessary protection that would be expected. We must ensure that Scotland provides a place of safety and sanctuary.

The guidance that I mentioned has been developed with expert partners and draws on intelligence regarding the vulnerabilities of certain groups, including women and girls, as identified by the United Nations refugee agency, the Scottish Refugee Council and Zero Tolerance.

The biggest risk factor is the fact that there is still a need in some areas for private matching. On-going informal social media private matching presents the biggest risk. The easiest way to stop that is to have in place a statutory matching service such as we have in the Scottish and Welsh supersponsor schemes, and I encourage the UK Government to follow that lead.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes portfolio questions on the constitution, external affairs and culture. There will be a brief pause to allow front-bench teams to change position, if they so wish.

Drug Deaths

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Angela Constance on accountability for delivering the national mission to reduce drug deaths and improve lives. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The loss of life in Scotland from drug-related deaths is as heartbreaking as it is unacceptable. Every drug death is a tragedy that leaves families, friends and loved ones looking for answers and support. I offer my condolences to everyone who has been affected by a drug death, and I reaffirm my commitment to work across Government and Parliament, and beyond, to deliver the national mission to save and improve lives.

The impact of problematic drug use is far reaching and can cause harm in every aspect of life, which is why our national mission needs to be far reaching through an all-Government, all-Scotland approach, with shared accountability at all levels.

People who have drug problems often experience complex needs and require support from more than one service. Consequently, the lines of accountability can be complex. Over the lifetime of this session of Parliament, we will ensure that effective accountability is in place through the establishment of the national care service, which will have responsibility for alcohol and drug services. It will provide a single structure for accountability and better oversight of delivery, and the further integration of community health and social care will provide better joined-up and person-centred services. However, we cannot wait until the national care service is fully established, and we are taking action now to improve accountability at all levels.

The national mission is backed by an additional investment of £50 million a year, which is a 67 per cent increase in funding since 2014-15, and we are now investing more than £140 million in drug and alcohol services. Of that additional £50 million, more than £20 million is invested through integration authorities for health and social care, with an additional £10 million to support the implementation of medication-assisted treatment—MAT—standards. Transparency and reporting remain key to the success of the national mission, and I am asking integration authorities to account for those funds more thoroughly by increasing the frequency of their reporting from annually to quarterly.

In May 2021, we opened four new funds to invest in recovery, local support, families and children, and other service improvement. We have committed up to £18 million a year on a multiyear basis, which provides security for third sector, grass-roots and advocacy organisations, which are often at the forefront of saving lives. That approach enables me to account for that investment and ensure that it is made in ways that will deliver the national mission.

Although accountability to Government and Parliament is essential, I have also been working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to support local areas to improve the accountability within alcohol and drug partnerships. We have agreed eight recommendations with COSLA to improve strategic planning and are testing new tools to enable local areas to review and improve accountability with appropriate external validation. Let me be clear: local lived experience panels are also core and central to the planning and development of local services.

We are working with Public Health Scotland to improve the use of local evidence through datasets such as the drug and alcohol information system, or DAISy. We are also developing a local performance framework, which will set out clear expectations across the national mission, provide transparency and enable us to measure progress at a local level.

Earlier this year, I announced phase 1 of the new treatment target to ensure that more people with problematic opiate use are accessing life-saving community treatment, and Public Health Scotland will publish quarterly data on progress. To ensure that people receive the protection of treatment or recovery that is right for them, we have set integration authorities the ambitious target of embedding the medication-assisted treatment targets by April.

Local progress from each health and social care partnership is being evaluated by the MAT support team, and a report will be published in June to coincide with my update to Parliament. The report will be a collation of operational procedures, data and, crucially, lived experience evaluation that will be undertaken by peer researchers.

Last November, I set out my expectation that we would increase the number of people who access residential rehab. I have responded to calls for more transparency and accountability by working with Public Health Scotland to track the number of placements. That gives me a clear line of sight on how the residential rehab money is being spent. I am committed to increasing the number of publicly funded placements by more than 300 per cent so that, by 2026, at least 1,000 people every year are publicly funded for their rehab placement.

Alongside that, we have published good practice on the pathways that are needed to ensure that people are prepared for rehab and receive the support that they need after their treatment in rehab is complete. As a result, my expectations could not be clearer.

In the first nine months of the most recent financial year, alcohol and drug partnerships funded 326 placements with an investment of around £2.2 million from the £5 million allocated to them to fund placements and aftercare. I am heartened by that progress, and I expect those numbers to continue to improve as we work with areas where the data shows—to us in Government and to local populations—that access is most challenging.

Our priority must always be preventing the tragedy of drug deaths, and each and every death is one too many. Each one devastates families and communities. I am determined that we will learn every lesson from every death, so that services are improved to better meet the needs of our citizens who are at risk of dying.

When a child or vulnerable adult dies, chief officers for public protection play a key role in ensuring that we learn vital lessons from those tragic events. I intend to do what is necessary to ensure that those same chief officers take on new accountability to ensure that lessons are learned and changes made as a result of reviews of all drug-related deaths. Therefore, I will be setting out clear expectations to ensure consistency in how those reviews are carried out, as well as issuing guidance and training for all those involved. The Scottish Drug Deaths Taskforce has a strong interest in that area of work and may make further recommendations in its forthcoming report this summer.

We already publish quarterly suspected drug death management information from Police Scotland, in addition to the annual national statistics report from the National Records of Scotland, and we are investing a further £592,000 to improve the national drug-related death database. The leadership that is provided by directors of public health will enable us to use that unparalleled amount of information to best effect and to deliver meaningful change.

I have taken action to improve the accountability of the national mission at a Scotland level. I have provided a renewed focus for the national drugs mission implementation group to provide scrutiny, challenge and advice to the Scottish Government and the wider sector. That includes advice from international experts. The second year of the national mission is focused on delivery on the ground—where it matters most—and I need the group to provide robust scrutiny and advice to ensure that we are delivering for those who need it most.

I will also publish a national mission plan in summer, setting out plans for implementing the mission during its remaining four years. The plan will include an outcomes framework that will enable us to better monitor our impact on prevention and early intervention; the reorientation of a system of care that is treatment, recovery and trauma informed; and support for families and communities.

Professor Alan Miller, as chair of the national collaborative for people with lived and living experience, will bring forward the vision for integrating human rights into national policy making and local service design and delivery. The collaborative will contribute to developing monitoring and accountability mechanisms based on the internationally recognised human rights that will be included in the forthcoming human rights bill.

The human rights approach and the national collaborative provide a way of holding the national Government and local government to account, of making sure that people who use drugs can participate in decision making that affects them, of exposing stigma and discrimination and of asking tough questions and demanding clear answers.

More than ever before, we are reforming services, providing practical as well as financial support, and gathering and publishing more information so that we can challenge ourselves and each other, at all levels, to foster responsibility for and accountability to people with drug and alcohol difficulties, who—like you and me—are entitled to services that meet their needs. That is a key part of getting it right for everyone.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister will now take questions on the issues that were raised in her statement. I intend to allow 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

We welcome the statement, which has provided some clarity on the Scottish Government’s approach to tackling this national shame. With 1,339 drug-related deaths in Scotland in 2020, it is clear that the national mission that has been set by the Government desperately needs to succeed.

I am glad that there is more detail on spending and accountability, and I thank the minister for looking at how accountability can be improved at all levels. Accountability is key to making real progress on the ground, but more clarification is needed on who is ultimately responsible for ensuring consistent implementation of the MAT standards. There are the First Minister, the Minister for Drugs Policy, the drug deaths task force, alcohol and drug partnerships and now the national mission implementation group. I have a straightforward question: who is ultimately accountable for delivering the national mission, and how are all those groups working together to tackle our national shame?

More specifically, time and again, I speak to people who have been on methadone for over two decades. They are desperate to come off it and on to a more modern and safe opiate replacement. MAT standard 2 states:

“All people”

should be

“supported to make an informed choice on what medication to use for MAT, and the appropriate dose.”

I know that I have asked this before, but what can the Scottish Government do to accelerate and facilitate movement of those people to safer replacement therapies, such as Buvidal?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I appreciate Ms Webber’s comments. Improving clarity and providing more detail about accountability and the investments that we are implementing to provide change on the ground are of crucial importance.

Of course the whole raison d’être of today’s statement was to demonstrate how, across the piece, we are improving accountability at national and local levels. The purpose of the national mission implementation group is to give oversight and advice, as opposed to taking responsibility. Responsibility will, of course, always rest with the Government, including me. It is important to stress that the integration authorities have a legal responsibility to plan and deliver treatment and recovery services, but we all have to recognise that they cannot do that alone and that they must work with others. They must provide adequate support to alcohol and drug partnerships, and alcohol and drug partnerships must, of course, engage and work with lived and living experience in the community and voluntary organisations.

Ultimately, I would never for a minute demur from my or the Government’s responsibilities, but accountability is shared. We are accountable to ourselves and to one another, and we all have a responsibility to hold ourselves and one another to account.

On Ms Webber’s final point, it is important to recognise that methadone is an internationally recognised treatment and should not be stigmatised. It should also never be our only offer. By and large, people need a holistic range of care and treatments. Buvidal has been shown to have much success, of course. It was first implemented in our prisons in Scotland during the pandemic, after trailblazing work in Wales was looked at. Buvidal does not suit everyone, but it offers huge opportunities to release people from making a daily trip to the chemist and to allow them to get on with their daily lives.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement.

We agree that accountability is crucial and that the Government must face scrutiny of its progress in tackling Scotland’s appalling record on drug fatalities. The minister is on record stating that the MAT standards would be implemented—not just embedded, but implemented—in a year. It gives me no satisfaction to say that that commitment is heading for failure. Rather than provide generalised statements, will the minister commit to publishing progress standard by standard and ADP by ADP, in order to allow proper scrutiny and accountability?

The minister stressed in her statement the importance of transparency. Will she ensure that a full and detailed breakdown of spending on drug and alcohol services will be published in one place and made easily accessible, as was recommended by Audit Scotland, which described the current information as “incomplete, disparate” and inconsistent?

Audit Scotland has recommended that the national drug and alcohol waiting time target of 28 days is too long. Will the minister commit to action to amend that?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The

medication assisted treatment standards are a significant undertaking; they are not a tick-box exercise. That is why I did, indeed, commit to embedding or implementing them by April this year, but that will have to be followed up not only by sustaining but by improving the standards.

This is not a tick-box exercise; I want far more evidence to be collected, beyond people showing me their operational procedures. That is why we are evaluating local progress from each health and social care partnership. That evaluation involves, of course, looking at their operational standards and their policies and procedures. Crucially, it also involves looking at data.

The third strand of our accountability and evaluation of progress at local level is the work that is being done with the peer researchers, because the work must always involve testing how services are delivered and received by those who need them and by those whom the services are meant to serve.

I am conscious of the time, Presiding Officer. I have already answered written parliamentary questions in detail, outlining that I will, as per my commitment to six-monthly reporting, be back on my feet in the chamber in June with a report that will not only look at the national picture but will cover progress area by area. We will be able to report on progress on each standard. That will be followed by a more in-depth report in the summer, which will look not just at whether a standard has been met area by area, but at the criteria for meeting each of the standards, area by area.

I reassure Ms Baker that a substantial amount of work is going on right now to gather up-to-date evidence on the progress that is being made and on the further work that we will have to pursue over the lifetime of the national mission.

I agree with the point about Audit Scotland and publishing information on spending in one place. The whole reason for moving to MAT standards is recognition that waiting time treatment targets are not the best measurement.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I very much welcome the content of today’s statement and thank the minister for advance sight of it.

Can the minister outline how the Scottish Government is working with stakeholders including local authorities, ADPs and the third sector, to improve local governance of services? Can she also confirm how best practice from across the country will be used to drive improvements in the service?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As I intimated in my statement, we have agreed on eight recommendations with COSLA. Essentially, that is about improving the work of alcohol and drug partnerships, but it is also about including health boards, local authorities, police and third sector partners. There is a need for all those partners to work together and to ensure that health boards are taking on their responsibilities to give appropriate support to integration authorities—and, subsequently, to ADPs.

As I also mentioned, we are currently testing some self-assessment tools. Again, that is all about governance, strategic planning, quality improvement and financial planning as well as accountability. That should be rolled out next month.

It is important to say that, as well as peer review and the new liaison structures between my officials and ADPs, there is scope for external validation to ensure that the right actions are being taken to improve local governance. Public Health Scotland is doing a range of work in that area. We are mapping the contributions, including investments, of partners to that work.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On Monday, I will publish a right to addiction recovery bill, which I will take through Parliament. The minister will be aware that 77 per cent of respondents to the consultation on the proposed bill were in support of it. Will the Scottish Government give its support to the proposed bill, which has been drafted by front-line

experts and people with lived experience, who know what is needed to tackle Scotland’s drug deaths?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I have said to Mr Ross on a number of occasions that his bill, when he introduces it and we see the detail of it, will absolutely be given a fair and sympathetic hearing. I know that a range of views have been expressed on the bill. I am not going to jump in and either give a blank cheque and a rosy endorsement or unfairly criticise something that I have not seen, but I look forward to seeing the detail. I have met Mr Ross to discuss his bill and to candidly discuss some of the issues that I hoped to see reflected in it when he introduces it. It will be given a fair and sympathetic hearing by this Government.

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

The minister mentioned health and social care partnerships. I anticipate that Glasgow’s partnership will have a key role, should NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde finally be able to proceed with the safe consumption facility that it planned in 2016. I pay tribute to Paul Sweeney for his consultation on a proposed bill on an associated matter.

Was the minister able to raise resolution of the legal uncertainty over safe consumption facilities when she attended the United Kingdom Government’s national drugs summit last week? What other matters were discussed?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I did, indeed, attend the UK Government drugs summit last week. I was invited; I think that I was the only representative there from a devolved nation. I am of the view that it is important to engage and discuss matters even with people with whom we have quite fundamental disagreements. The issues that I raised directly with the UK Government were issues that I have raised in the past in relation to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. I would like that act to be reformed, but if the UK Government will not reform it, I want the powers to be devolved.

We discussed once again matters including safe drug consumption. Members will be aware that, as a Government, we are also pursuing our own activities and actions within what we can do under our legal powers. We also discussed issues around pill-press regulation. I met the National Crime Agency recently and am pushing the UK Government to make progress on that matter. I think that it is willing; I am just keen for it to go a wee bit faster.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for her statement, but it has left me rather underwhelmed. She has said repeatedly that establishing overdose prevention centres in Scotland is a priority and that they are an essential tool for tackling the drug deaths crisis in our midst; yet, in today’s set-piece statement on drug deaths, there was not a single mention of the Government’s work so far on delivering overdose prevention centres in Scotland. The minister will know that, yesterday, I launched my consultation on my proposed member’s bill to establish OPCs in Scotland, but I must ask why it has been left to Opposition members to drive the pace of reform when we agree on the need for them. When are we likely to see genuine, tangible updates and progress from the Government on the delivery of overdose prevention sites within its competence?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I made a commitment to the Parliament about improving accountability and governance. Although issues in and around governance might not excite everyone, they are crucially important. This is a shared agenda. We all have our individual responsibilities and our part to play, and I consider it a crucial part of the national mission that we hold ourselves and each other to account both locally and nationally.

Mr Sweeney is right: there is strong support right across Parliament for safer consumption rooms. In my view, as in his, the evidence is clear and compelling. The only debate now is about how they will actually be delivered. I am sure that Mr Sweeney is aware that the Scottish Government is leaving no stone unturned to deliver clinically and legally safe consumption facilities within our powers, and I will continue to pursue that activity.

At the end of the day, I do not want to be asking the UK Government for permission, because it is quite clear to me that it will not reform the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and that, certainly in the short to medium term, we are not going to come to an agreement with the UK Government on safer consumption facilities. That is a matter of regret when even Mr Ross is of the view that the Conservatives should not stand in the way of a pilot.

The consensus in Scotland is strong. We are engaged with our partners, and we will leave no stone that is within our powers unturned. That is the route that I am following. I appreciate that Mr Sweeney has an alternative proposal, and, as with other legislative proposals, it will be given a fair and sympathetic hearing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I point out that there are six more members whom I hope to call. The position with time is not as it was 10 minutes ago, so I make a plea for succinct questions and answers. I appreciate that there is a lot of ground to cover, but let us see whether we can fit everybody in.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I will ask the minister about drug-testing schemes whereby drugs can be tested for rogue ingredients that could lead to extreme harm or even death. It is my understanding that licences to facilitate such schemes can be given by the UK Government—indeed, one was given to the Loop scheme in Bristol in conjunction with Bristol City Council. What is the minister’s position on the matter?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As I have stated to Parliament before, I am fully supportive of the work that is being done to implement drug-checking facilities in Scotland. The task force funded some initial research projects by the University of Stirling on the development of a drug-checking programme, and I am pleased that the first application for the three prospective sites will be submitted to the Home Office in the next month. It is encouraging that the project in Bristol has received a licence, and I very much hope that the Home Office will see the benefits of the introduction of such facilities in Scotland. I made that point to Mr Malthouse when I met him last week.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

The minister knows that the Liberal Democrats want her to succeed on this issue and, to that end, she has our good wishes.

In the statement, it is encouraging to see a direction of travel towards rehab, but the services need to be sustainable even when occupancy drifts below 50 per cent. Before people can access rehab, they need to be stabilised first. The minister and I have discussed many times the need to address the gap in stabilisation services. That issue did not feature in today’s statement, so will she update members on where we are on stabilisation?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Mr Cole-Hamilton will appreciate that the statement was about governance and accountability and some of the nuts and bolts around them. Like him, I am a supporter of stabilisation services, although they are not necessarily easy to run, and they are expensive. They are separate from residential rehabilitation and the abstinence-based programmes, but there must be links between relevant services.

Some of our work on regional and national commissioning in the residential rehabilitation sector is quite germane in that the work that we are doing through Scotland Excel will help to establish the level of need in different geographical areas across the country. We are very focused on that issue.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Stuart McMillan joins us remotely.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I remind members that I am a board member of Moving On Inverclyde, a local addiction service.

Will the minister provide an update on how she is going to ensure that the views of recovering users, their families and associated charities continue to be taken on board?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Yes, absolutely. Governance and accountability are not only about data, policies and procedures, important as they are. All those activities need to be informed

centrally and consistently by the views of people with lived and living experience. Much of the work that we have done around accountability has been in response to what we have heard from people with drug and alcohol problems, their families and the organisations and advocates that represent them.

We continue to report quarterly on our investments in residential rehab, we have committed to six-monthly reporting on MAT standards, and we are increasing financial security. There is also the treatment target and our work to improve governance and accountability at both national and local levels.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Drug deaths are our national shame. I welcome what the minister said about data and accountability, with each drug death now being investigated. However, I am upset that that information is not already available, because it is so vital. Once the investigation into a drug death has been concluded, what is the mechanism that will allow the lessons learned to be translated into action to save lives in the future?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

There is part of this that I feel very strongly about and always struggle with. When we talk about learning the lessons, that trips off the tongue very easily, but it can sound really trite. I know from my background as a professional social worker and from holding other Government portfolios that there is guidance that sets clear parameters for when the death of a child or, indeed, a vulnerable adult should be investigated. There is guidance on how that should be done and on how information should be shared.

As a minimum, we should have the same for the reporting of reviews into drug-related deaths. We will be doing some further work and consultation on that, and I am keen that we get it absolutely right. I am also very conscious that the reviews can be really important for families who are seeking answers.

I feel very strongly about this issue. Although we, as politicians, can sound a bit trite when speaking about it, I want to ensure that we make a difference on it.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement, and I welcome her commitment to improving consistency in drug death reviews. As she said, that will improve data collection and will allow national trends to be established. Most importantly, it will give families answers and will ensure that they have certainty in the process. Will the minister commit to taking any necessary action to ensure that there is consistency across Scotland in how drug death reviews are carried out and that they are carried out in as many cases as possible?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Yes. Following on from my answer to Sandesh Gulhane, Ms Mackay makes an important point about consistency. Although reviews of drug deaths are carried out in most areas, they are all done in a different fashion and there is not always visibility in the review process or of the outcomes at either a local or a national level.

I have an open mind. As a minimum, the new procedures that we put in place should at least reflect what is in place for child deaths or under procedures for vulnerable adults. If Ms Mackay has further suggestions about how we can strengthen our resolve and approach in this area, she is very welcome to share them.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

I welcome the minister’s statement and the clarity on accountability. As part of that important accountability, how can we ensure that services are flexible enough to meet people where they are and to enable them to participate fully in the decision making that affects them?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As I intimated earlier, the integration authorities have clear legal responsibilities to plan and provide services. It is clear, however, that they cannot do that alone. We also need greater clarity and support around the role and function of alcohol and drug partnerships, and a range of partners need to be involved, including voluntary organisations. We need more meaningful partnership with voluntary organisations at a local level.

The MAT standards provide another vehicle by which improved partnership working will be driven. Another aspect of MAT standards that I know Ms Maguire will be interested in is how they help us to make systemic changes to prevent people from being bounced around between addiction, homelessness and mental health services. We are embarking on that work right now, as we are investing in and reforming drug and alcohol services like never before.

Our longer-term vision is to introduce a national care service, which will provide a single structure for accountability. With the further integration of community health and social care, we will be able to provide better joined-up and person-centred services.

Social Security Benefits

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-04621, in the name of Ben Macpherson, on an update on social security benefits. Members who wish to speak in the debate should press their request-to-speak buttons now.

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

Social security is an important human right. It is a shared investment in building a fairer and better society. None of us knows when we might need it or whether someone close to us might need it, which is why, collectively, and especially in these serious and challenging times, we—Scotland’s politicians—must work together to continue to successfully deliver and develop our devolved social security system, which is based on our shared principles of dignity, fairness and respect.

I wish to update Parliament on the progress that we have made, particularly during the pandemic, and on how we will build on that strong foundation to safely and securely deliver the remaining devolved benefits. The debate is a chance for us to reflect on the remarkable progress that has been made since Parliament unanimously passed the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018, and to look forward to what further change and assistance the Scottish Government will deliver for the people whom we serve.

We have used, are using and will continue to use our devolved powers proactively, purposefully and passionately to strengthen and develop our still fairly new public service and to deliver significant extra financial support to people in our communities who need it most. The Scottish Government has now introduced 12 benefits, seven of which are brand-new forms of support that are only available in Scotland. In this financial year, through record investment of £3.9 billon in benefit expenditure, we will provide support to more than 1 million people.

In this financial year, we have chosen to invest more than the money that is being transferred to us by the United Kingdom Government, by around £360 million. As a Government, we have taken that decision on how we allocate our limited resources and use our limited powers to introduce new forms of support to tackle child poverty, promote equality and mitigate cost of living pressures.

We are taking a range of actions. For example, by the end of 2022 we will extend the Scottish child payment to under-16s and increase it to £25 per week per child. By that point, around 430,000 children who are living in low-income households could be eligible—a fourfold increase on the 104,000 children we are already helping.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Various briefings have come in ahead of the debate, as we will all know, and all of them have pointed to the fact that children are still living in poverty today. They cannot wait until the end of year, particularly children whose families receive bridging payments. Will the Government therefore commit to doubling the bridging payments?

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

We have answered Pam Duncan-Glancy on that point several times. As she knows, the reason why we cannot extend the Scottish child payment until the end of the year is that we have to go through a process with the Department for Work and Pensions to access the data and implement the change systematically. We have provided bridging payments in the meantime, in order to provide that extra assistance.

That support has been welcomed by families across Scotland, as has our package of five family payments for low-income families, which will be worth more than £10,000 by the time a family’s first child turns six, and £9,700 for subsequent children. That compares with less than £1,800 for an eligible family’s first child in England and Wales—a difference of more than £8,200 for every eligible child born in Scotland and proof that, using our powers, we are delivering for the households who need it most.

We reacted to the cost of living crisis by increasing eight Scottish benefits by 6 per cent, which is closer to the rate of inflation than previous plans, which were based on the CPI of 3.1 per cent.

We delivered and introduced several of our new benefits during the pandemic, including the Scottish child payment and our complex disability benefits. Last week, Audit Scotland said that that was “a significant achievement”.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I am grateful to the minister for taking an intervention. Audit Scotland also stated that the implementation costs of new devolved benefits are “not routinely reported on” in the public domain, which inevitably makes it

“difficult for those in scrutiny roles to track and compare over time.”

What assessment of those comments has the minister made?

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

We welcome all the recommendations in the Audit Scotland report and will work to implement them, and we will work with the auditors, as we have throughout the process.

With regard to progress during the pandemic, our delivery partners at the Department for Work and Pensions also had to reprioritise their programme of work. We are now working with them to plan our timetable for delivery of the remaining devolved benefits and the transfer of around 700,000 cases from the DWP to Social Security Scotland.

I take this opportunity to thank all those who are involved in the delivery of our devolved social security benefits, including all my officials in the Scottish Government; the UK ministers and civil servants who have been involved; everyone at Social Security Scotland; our experience panels; the Scottish Commission on Social Security; the disability and carer benefits expert advisory group; and every stakeholder and individual who has contributed to the development of our 12 benefits and those that we are currently preparing to introduce.

On that note, I move on to a new benefit that will directly support around 400,000 low-income households with their energy costs. Beginning in winter 2022-23, we will introduce our low-income winter heating assistance. The new benefit will replace the DWP’s cold weather payments and will guarantee an annual £50 payment to around 400,000 low-income households each winter, which is an investment of around £20 million a year.

The current £25 cold weather payment is paid only if the weather gets cold enough and for a sustained period of time. In contrast, our replacement winter heating benefit will provide a guaranteed £50 payment, which ensures that it provides targeted, stable, reliable financial support to those who need it most. It will deliver certainty and will no longer be tied to temperatures recorded at weather stations that are often miles from people’s homes. It represents an investment of around £20 million each year.

Since 2014-15, there have been only two years in which spend on cold weather payments in Scotland has been above £20 million—only £325,000 was paid to just 11,000 households in the winter that we just had. There is no doubt that the new Scottish benefit will be of huge help to people in the coming winter. It is another way in which the Government is supporting people and mitigating the cost of living crisis.

The next benefit that we will introduce is Scottish carers assistance, which is our replacement for carers allowance. I am pleased to announce that we will begin to roll out Scottish carers assistance by the end of 2023, with full national introduction in spring 2024. The final dates will be agreed following our on-going work with the UK Government, but this is a key milestone for our new benefit.

Our consultation on Scottish carers assistance and our plans for future improvements to increase the support available to carers has just ended. Those plans include an additional payment for those caring for more than one disabled person, and proposals to remove full-time education restrictions and increase the earnings limit, so that carers can earn more and still get financial support. We will consider the responses to the consultation and, later this year, we will confirm the improvements that we will make and when we will be able to make them.

In the meantime, we will continue to pay the carers allowance supplement, which provides real, tangible support to around 90,000 carers. We have now delivered £188 million-worth of carers allowance supplement support since the benefit was introduced, in 2018—including two additional payments that were paid in 2020 and 2021 in response to the pandemic.

We are also delivering significant changes this year with our new disability benefits. After we successfully rolled it out last winter, child disability payment has already helped more than an estimated 3,000 children.

I am proud that, just a few months ago, we successfully introduced the adult disability payment, which is our replacement for the UK personal independence payment. On 21 March, we launched it in three council areas and it will be phased in across 10 more areas in the coming months, ahead of full national introduction at the end of August.

The adult disability payment is delivering significant improvements, which range from never using the private sector to carry out health assessments to providing an independent advocacy service and short-term assistance if people challenge a review decision.

Further evidence of our human rights-based approach in action is our introduction of indefinite awards for people on the highest level of adult disability payment whose needs are highly unlikely to change, which will provide the most severely disabled people with long-term financial security. In addition, we have moved away from the DWP’s definition of terminal illness to one that is based on clinical judgment instead of life expectancy. Importantly, benefit applications from people with a terminal illness will be fast-tracked and paid at the maximum rate.

The adult disability payment is, without doubt, the most complex benefit that we have introduced, and the seamless, safe and secure transfer of hundreds of thousands of people’s payments from the DWP is not a simple administrative process. From the middle of next month, we will start to move personal independence payment awards and, from the end of August, we will start to move working-age disability living allowance awards for individuals who would otherwise need to undergo an assessment or reassessment with the DWP. People in Scotland whose cases will be transferred do not need to do anything; we will do it, and we will do it seamlessly. We will keep them informed throughout the process.

There is a lot more that I could say about the remarkable progress that we have made since the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 was passed just four years ago. In that time, we have created a new public service for Scotland, delivered new and replacement benefits and positively impacted thousands of lives. This afternoon, I look forward to hearing from colleagues about how, together, we can make an even bigger difference.

We have ambitions to help more people as we use our powers to create a modern, future-proof social security system—a system that can serve the people of Scotland well and effectively for decades to come, and one that embodies one of the four key words that is written on the mace that lies before us: compassion.

To do that, we will have to be ambitious but appropriately realistic. We will have to move forward purposefully but be responsible. We will have to put people first, not party politics. We will need to work together to encourage benefit take-up and remove the stigma around social security that, unfortunately, has built up in previous years.

The months and years ahead are, arguably, the most significant for the new system that we have created and for those of us who serve in communities across Scotland. In these serious times, I encourage my fellow MSPs to play their part in supporting our constituents to access any available support to which they are entitled, and I encourage colleagues to be constructive in the next, really important phase of delivering social security benefits in Scotland.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that social security is a human right and an investment in people; welcomes the introduction and delivery of 12 Scottish social security benefits in total, seven of which are new forms of support only available in Scotland, including most recently the Scottish Child Payment, Child Disability Payment and Adult Disability Payment; notes the more humane and compassionate process for applying for the Adult Disability Payment, which contrasts with the intrusive assessments often required to receive Personal Independence Payment from the UK Government; further notes the implementation of a clinically determined definition of “terminal illness” and fast-tracking of these applications for support; welcomes the introduction of indefinite awards within Scottish disability assistance, which provides the most severely disabled people with long-term financial security; looks forward to the introduction of new benefits, including Low Income Winter Heating Assistance and Scottish Carer’s Assistance; notes that social security is one of the three key pillars in the national mission to tackle child poverty, and commends the extension of the Scottish Child Payment to under-16s and plans to increase it to £25 per week per child by the end of the year; welcomes the substantial financial support that these benefits provide to people, which is important at all times and particularly so now as people are impacted by the cost of living crisis in the UK, and acknowledges the Scottish Government’s record investment of £3.9 billon in benefit expenditure in 2022-23, which is £360 million above that received by the UK Government, all of which will provide meaningful social security support to over one million people, including low-income families and households, disabled people and carers.

The Presiding Officer

Members might wish to know that we have some time available to give back for interventions.