Scottish Parliament, 9 June 2022

296 contributions from 67 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 members as possible, I would be grateful for short and succinct questions and responses.

Teaching Profession (Diversity)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the diversity in the teaching profession Scotland annual data report, published in May, which states that there is a continued chronic and disproportionate lack of minority ethnic teachers in Scotland’s schools. (S6O-01206)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Scottish Government is clear that the continued underrepresentation of minority ethnic teachers at all levels in Scotland is unacceptable and requires urgent attention.

Work is already under way. The diversity in the teaching profession and education workforce sub-group, which is part of the wider race equality and anti-racism in education programme, is taking forward a number of actions, including working with the Scottish Council of Deans of Education to develop a robust framework for initial teacher education providers to identify and address the barriers that impede minority ethnic student teachers. That will result in them being better supported throughout their journey into permanent posts.

We are also working with the newly appointed General Teaching Council for Scotland senior education officer—a post that is supported by Scottish Government funding—to establish effective leadership at all levels within local authorities, regional improvement collaboratives and schools in order to facilitate improved racial diversity within the teaching profession.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s response.

The statistics are stark. In 2017, only 1.2 per cent of primary teachers and 2.1 per cent of secondary teachers were from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities. By 2021, those figures had risen to only 1.4 per cent and 2.7 per cent respectively. The figures for promoted posts—primary principal teachers, deputes and head teachers—are even more concerning. In 2017, only 0.4 per cent of such posts in primary schools and 0.8 per cent of such posts in secondary schools were from BAME communities, and in 2021, those numbers rose by only 0.2 per cent to 0.6 per cent and by 0.1 per cent to 0.9 per cent respectively.

Will the cabinet secretary join me in calling on local authorities as employers to actively explore positive action measures, as allowed under the Equality Act 2010, to address underrepresentation, particularly at senior levels? Measures could include initiatives such as the current pilot project by Glasgow City Council to support five acting PT roles for BAME teachers.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The positive action that Glasgow City Council has taken in this area is absolutely to be commended. The diversity in the teaching profession and education workforce sub-group is considering the ways in which to capture and measure such actions, so that it can support other local authorities to be similarly ambitious.

I concur absolutely with Kaukab Stewart’s sentiments that those figures are unacceptable. The Scottish Government is determined and it will continue to work with all local authorities to ensure that we can, and will, do better.

Superfast Broadband (Orkney)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

2. To ask the Scottish Government how island communities in Orkney can be involved in decisions about how superfast broadband is rolled out in their areas. (S6O-01207)

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I have met the member twice, along with Orkney Islands Council and Highlands and Islands Enterprise, to discuss the issue.

The R100—reaching 100 per cent—contract build is being delivered in phases determined by the successful bidder. A key part of the deployment of 16 new subsea fibre cables that will enable the delivery of full fibre broadband to our islands has started. Installation to connect seven islands began last week and will be completed by September.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I thank the cabinet secretary for her response and for her engagement with me and the Orkney Islands Council. She will be aware from those discussions that there is growing concern in Orkney that the Government’s R100 programme will fall short of connecting 100 per cent of households. Those subsea cables are being laid, but once landfall is made, there seems little prospect of many, if not most, of the households in each of those islands actually being connected under the contract. The Government’s own maps show the extent to which households are set to miss out.

Will the cabinet secretary agree to meet me, Orkney Islands Council and other local representatives again to discuss how affordable access to Openreach’s fibre backhaul might be granted to companies that are willing and able to plug those gaps? Will she look to take steps to ensure that island communities can be more actively involved in the roll-out of the programme?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I am very happy to meet the member again. It is off the back of those previous meetings that I have been pushing the bidders—in this case, Openreach—to extend R100 contract coverage, by using available contractual headroom as far as possible. It remains my commitment to ensure that we connect more properties than we were originally expecting to. Obviously, properties that fall outwith the reach of the R100 contracts or commercial builds are still eligible for a voucher that is worth up to £5,000 through the broadband voucher scheme.

The United Kingdom Government’s project gigabit is also an opportunity to complete the job on islands. I have had extensive conversations with the UK Government because, at the moment, the thing that is stopping us from using project gigabit to finish the job on island communities is the arbitrary cost cap, which does not work for rural areas. However, I am sure that Liam McArthur and I can discuss those issues further in a meeting.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Despite the reserved nature of telecommunications legislation, the Scottish Government has had to intervene, using its own resources, to extend access to digital infrastructure across the country. In particular, I welcome the installation of 16 new subsea fibre cables that the cabinet secretary mentioned, which will improve the connectivity of island communities in my region. Can the cabinet secretary expand a little more on what specific improvements are expected to be realised as a result of that welcome announcement?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The member is quite right to remind the chamber that telecoms is wholly reserved to the UK Parliament. Despite that, our investment of £384 million, in the R100 north contract alone, will be truly transformational. That is an example of where, because of its importance in Scotland, we are prioritising funding in an area that is not necessarily within our powers. That funding will deliver access to gigabit-capable fibre to premises and connections to more than 59,000 properties across the north of Scotland, including many of the islands. The 16 subsea cables that the member referenced will deliver future-proofed fibre backhaul. Alongside existing subsea cables, which were delivered through the digital Scotland superfast broadband programme, that will provide connections for more than 10,000 properties in island communities.

Benefits (Implications of Resource Spending Review)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what the implications of its resource spending review are for the roll-out of Social Security Scotland’s planned programme of benefits. (S6O-01208)

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

The resource spending review sets out our investment of more than £4.2 billion in benefit expenditure in 2022-23, which is more than £460 million above what has been received from the United Kingdom Government. That £4.2 billion is an investment in people and will provide support to more than 1 million people, including low-income families and households, disabled people and carers.

The funding highlights the strength of our commitment to social security and takes into account the benefits that we are due to introduce, including the extension of the Scottish child payment, the national roll-out of adult disability payment, our new low-income winter heating assistance payment and, of course, the transfer of 700,000 cases.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The cost of living crisis will hit families hardest, and tackling child poverty must be the main focus of Government. Bearing in mind the limited scope of Scotland’s social security powers under devolution, what impact are Scottish benefits having to mitigate of the worst excesses of the cost of living crisis?

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

This year, we are investing almost £770 million through a package of cost of living support measures and social security support that is not available elsewhere in the UK. Our five family benefits include the Scottish child payment, which we have doubled to £20 and will increase to £25 by the end of the year, when we will extend it to under-16s, which will mean that it covers around 400,000 children.

This month, carers will also receive one of our two carers allowance supplement payments, which will be tangible financial support of more than £42 million for around 90,000 carers this year. In addition, we have our low income winter heating assistance payment, as I mentioned, and households with severely disabled children and young people will receive our child winter heating assistance.

Green Economy (Alignment of Education System)

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that Scotland’s education system is properly aligned with the future workforce requirements of the emerging green economy. (S6O-01209)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government is committed to a just transition to net zero. Building on action to date, including the publication of the climate emergency skills action plan, the national strategy for economic transformation sets out our commitment and approach to adapting the education and skills system to make it more agile and responsive to our economic needs and ambitions, including our net zero targets.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The coming years must see radical change in many existing sectors of the economy, from home heating systems—including the Government’s commitment to retrofit 200,000 homes per year with heat pumps—to our growing demand for electric vehicle and hydrogen vehicle servicing. Delivering the workforce with the skills to provide those services and to manufacture the products that are required will take time to develop. The Scottish Government has committed £1.3 million to the national transition training fund to support energy efficiency and retrofitting skills. Does the minister accept that that will cover but a fraction of the amount that is needed to support colleges and small and medium-sized enterprises in Scotland to prepare pupils for a net zero future?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The member is right to highlight the extent of the challenge, which we are focusing on. The climate emergency skills action plan sets out the actions that we need to take to ensure that our workforce across all sectors is able to support the transition to net zero.

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

Given that Aberdeen is on the cusp of a just transition, this will be of great interest to families in my constituency. Will the Scottish Government clarify how it is working with schools and apprenticeship bodies to ensure that Scotland’s future workforce, such as apprentices who are learning a trade in plumbing and heating, learn the vital skills that are needed to work effectively with the emerging technologies in renewables?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

It is vital that we provide the skills that the economy needs both now and in the future. That is particularly true in Aberdeen, where there is a need to diversify the regional economy away from carbon-intensive industries and to capitalise

on the opportunities that the transition to net zero will bring.

Apprenticeships are a key way for employers to support the transition and to continue to invest in their workforce. Agile and responsive work-based learning, including apprenticeships, will support those ambitions. The climate emergency skills action plan notes the importance of developing new work-based learning pathways to capitalise on net zero opportunities and to maximise the uptake of apprenticeships and green jobs.

The Presiding Officer

Before we move on to the next question, I ask members to avoid indulging in conversations while questions are being asked and answered.

Consultant Oncologists (NHS Tayside)

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

5. To ask the Scottish Government, with regard to the recruitment of consultant oncologists in NHS Tayside, how many candidates have proceeded to interview stage to date and from which countries. (S6O-01210)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I

n the past two years to 31 May 2022, four applicants have proceeded to interview. All four were working in the United Kingdom, but their nationalities were British, Australian, Sri Lankan and Singaporean. NHS Tayside remains in on-going dialogue with two potential overseas appointees who are currently based in Canada and are of Indian origin. Additionally, one trainee at the centre has recently taken up a full-time post there, and it is pleasing that they have seen their long-term future at Tayside cancer centre. We know that NHS Tayside’s breast cancer service has been particularly challenged, and securing the long-term future for the service has been a priority for me and for the board.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

In 2019, the Royal College of Physicians conducted a service review of NHS Tayside oncology. We understand that it found that staff in NHS Tayside cancer services were subject to a culture of management bullying and intimidation. NHS Tayside ensured that the report did not see the light of day, and it remains a secret. In the interests of transparency, and given the serious concerns that members have regarding NHS Tayside cancer services, will the cabinet secretary ensure that that report is released to Parliament, because the staff and patients of NHS Tayside deserve to know?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I will certainly look into the issue that Dr Gulhane has asked to me to look into. As he knows, there have been further reviews of and reports on NHS Tayside’s breast cancer service.

I met the clinicians not too long ago, and they are still concerned about the breast cancer service, but we have a committed team of clinicians who provide the highest possible level of cancer care. They are—as I am and as the board is—looking to the future to ensure that we have a stable breast cancer service for the people of Tayside.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The cabinet secretary says that there is a committed team there, but the reality is that the last breast cancer oncologist left Dundee two weeks ago. There is no breast cancer oncology service

in Dundee, and patients are having to travel hundreds of miles to access those services.

I back the calls of the other member regarding the publication of that report. The flawed Health Improvement Scotland report, which was commissioned by the Government, is actually at the core of the recruitment issue.

I raised this issue with the cabinet secretary on 27 January, and he said that he was

“deeply involved in the issue”.—[

Official Report

, 27 January 2022; c 5.]

What progress has been made to ensure that this service can be retained in Dundee?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

A number of actions have been taken. For example, there have been more recruitment drives. In fact, there have been six adverts out this year and another three revised adverts are to come out shortly.

On the breast cancer service, I agree with Michael Marra that it is not a satisfactory situation. He and I do not dispute that. However, to put it into context, about 150 patients are referred to the breast cancer service in Tayside each week. Of those 150, around seven will have to travel for treatment. That is clearly suboptimal for the seven people involved. However, it is important that the vast majority of people who are referred and then go on to get treatment will get treatment from NHS Tayside.

Debt (Essential Bills)

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to a report by StepChange Debt Charity Scotland, which highlighted that clients’ average arrears on essential bills had increased by £659 to £2,961. (S6O-01211)

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

The Scottish Government is acutely aware that households are facing the cost of living crisis and rising energy bills, with people on the lowest incomes being hit the hardest. It is therefore very concerning that those who are struggling are carrying a growing burden of debt. That is why, with our limited powers and resources, we are investing almost £770 million this year through a package of cost of living measures and social security support not available anywhere else in the United Kingdom to support people in need. We are also investing approximately £12 million this year to support free income-maximisation, welfare and debt advice. That includes funding of over £1 million to StepChange Debt Charity Scotland.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

The minister might know that a StepChange report

says that a growing percentage of its clients are tenants in the rented sector—62 per cent in 2021. Can the Scottish Government suggest what help is available specifically for tenants who find themselves in severe financial difficulty?

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

We are providing a total of £83 million for discretionary housing payments. That includes over £68 million to mitigate the bedroom tax and an additional £14 million to mitigate the damaging impact of other UK Government welfare cuts, including the benefit cap—as far as we can within our powers—and changes to local housing allowance rates.

In addition, the £10 million tenant grant fund helps private and social tenants who are struggling the most financially as a direct result of the pandemic and prevents homelessness. The action that we are taking through the Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill to permanently introduce pre-action protocols for those who are in rent arrears will formalise the steps that a private landlord should take, as early as possible, to support a tenant who has fallen into rent arrears.

National Health Service Waiting Lists

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what new steps have been taken to tackle national health service waiting lists, which now reportedly stand at over 680,000 patients. (S6O-01212)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The latest waiting times statistics, which were published last week and cover the quarter to 31 March 2022, reflect on-going significant challenges as a result of the pandemic and the inevitable backlog that has built up as a result of pausing non-urgent care. We are working with NHS boards to get those who are waiting for treatment the care that they need as quickly as possible. A key part of our recovery is the creation of the national treatment centres. Four NTCs are due to open over the next year, which will provide additional ring-fenced capacity for planned care. As well as investment in new infrastructure, the new NHS Scotland centre for sustainable delivery is leading work on new and innovative practice to reduce waiting times.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Since I lodged this question, as the cabinet secretary refers to, reports have shown that, yet again, there has been an increase to waiting lists, and there are now over 700,000 people waiting.

Long before the pandemic, data was showing that NHS waiting lists were rising year on year; 120,000 people were waiting in March 2020. The cumulative impact of waiting lists clearly shows that the Government’s recovery plan is not robust enough to tackle this significant challenge.

Will the cabinet secretary commit today to real and meaningful action to tackle delayed discharge; to implement a real NHS cancer plan, including funding for more temporary clinics and dedicated treatment centres; and to proper pay and conditions for staff in health and social care?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I say to Paul O’Kane that we are taking forward many of the actions that he requests. We are in active negotiations with the trade unions on pay. Figures that were released this week show record staffing levels in the NHS—almost 30,000 whole-time equivalents have been recruited to our NHS since we came to power.

Having anybody on a waiting list is, of course, unsatisfactory and suboptimal, and we do not want to see it. We were making progress pre-pandemic. If the member looks at the pre-pandemic figures, he will see that the number of out-patients who were waiting for a first appointment reduced by more than 20 per cent. Over the same period—the 18 months up to March 2020—the number who were waiting more than 12 weeks for an out-patient appointment fell by more than 30 per cent.

We were making progress, but then we were hit by the global pandemic, which has affected health services up and down the country and, indeed, globally. We will continue with our £1 billion recovery plan and continue to invest in our national treatment centres. Most importantly, we will continue to invest in NHS staff, who are pivotal to that recovery.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes general question time. Before we move on to First Minister’s question time, I invite members to join me in welcoming to the gallery His Excellency Markus Leitner, Ambassador of Switzerland to the United Kingdom. [

Applause

.]

National Health Service Waiting Times

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. This time last year, there were 648 patients in Scotland’s national health service who had waited more than two years for treatment. How many people are now enduring that long wait?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

There are more people now waiting for NHS treatment. That will be the case for those who have been waiting for the longest periods of time, including more than a year and more than two years. That is why our NHS recovery plan is so important; it is to improve waiting times generally and to ensure that health boards are targeting those who are waiting the longest.

As we know—indeed, as the health secretary has just been narrating to the chamber—before the pandemic we were seeing progress on reducing waiting times. Given the pressures that there were at that time on the national health service, the pandemic obviously had a significant impact. However, in terms of the statistics that have been published most recently, we are starting to see tentative signs of improvement as a result of the actions that we are taking. In the most recent quarter, for example, we saw an increasing number of first out-patient appointments and a slight reduction in the number of those waiting for more than 12 weeks. Similarly, with the treatment time guarantee, an increasing number of patients were being seen.

The situation is challenging for the national health service. It cannot be otherwise, given the impact of a two-year pandemic that is still making its presence felt. However, the Government is supporting health boards to ensure that recovery happens and that, as part of that, those who have been waiting the longest for treatment are seen as quickly as possible.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The question was straightforward: there were 648 patients last year who had been waiting longer than two years for treatment. What is the number now? The answer that the First Minister could not or would not give is that 10,613 people in Scotland have waited more than two years for treatment in our NHS. The First Minister talked about tentative improvements, but that is a 16-fold increase in a year. That is not the NHS recovery that her Government promised; things are getting worse—far worse—not better. Now we are hearing of heart patients who are being given appointments two years down the line. Reports today state that people are receiving appointment dates in July 2024. First Minister, is that acceptable?

The First Minister

In terms of the particular case cited in the media today, I do not think that that is acceptable. I know that a review of that particular appointment—which is a follow-up out-patient appointment, not a first out-patient appointment—is being undertaken and that contact will be made with the patient.

It is the case that waiting times generally, and the numbers of those waiting an unacceptably long time for treatment, have increased over the past year. I am afraid that that is the impact of a global pandemic. We have, over the past year, seen further waves of Covid that have had a big impact on the number of treatments that can be done in our national health service, as infection control measures have had to be tightened up and, of course, a number of staff have had Covid and been off sick. That is an impact that countries across the United Kingdom, Europe and the world are finding at the moment. That is why we are investing so heavily. Record numbers of staff are working in our national health service. The number has gone up considerably in the last year, and it is up by almost 30,000 since the Government took office. That is also why we are investing specifically in the recovery plan. Although the signs are tentative, it is encouraging that we are starting to see some of the improvements that I narrated in my earlier answer.

Although I am responsible for NHS Scotland, as is the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, it is the case that in very challenging circumstances, whether we consider waiting times for accident and emergency services or more generally, we see, through the efforts of staff in NHS Scotland, the work that is being done. For example the most recent statistics are that in Scotland, 101 patients are waiting per 1,000 of the population; in England, that is 112 per 1,000; and in Wales 221 per 1,000. That does not excuse the performance in Scotland—we have a responsibility to tackle the issue and that is exactly what we are doing.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister says that things are encouraging. How encouraging must it be for that heart patient to get a letter telling her to wait another two years to be seen?

As expected, the First Minister speaks about the pandemic. I have a constituent in Lossie who has waited four and a half years from first being seen by his doctor to getting the operation that he needs. Four and a half years is far longer than the pandemic—in fact, it is pretty much an entire parliamentary session. The longer and longer waiting times are a problem across every area of Scotland’s NHS.

Twice as many Scots are waiting more than three months for key diagnostic tests when compared to last year. This morning, the president of the Royal College of Radiologists, Jeanette Dickson, said that for every four-week delay to a diagnosis of cancer, the risk of dying increases by 10 per cent. Those are her words. People are deteriorating; cancers are growing—sometimes, they become incurable. More often, patients have to have more devastating treatment, with bigger side effects that have a bigger impact on their quality of life, for the same outcome.

If our NHS is currently in that position, how bad will it be by winter, when so many more people need treatment? Will the First Minister act now, instead of waiting for the crisis to strike, as she did last year?

The First Minister

That is not what we did last year. What happened last year was that we had further waves of the Covid pandemic, similar to countries across the world. Of course I will mention the pandemic—there is not a health service on the face of the planet that has not had to deal with the impacts of the pandemic. Anybody who looks at the situation reasonably understands that.

Before the pandemic, we were seeing progress. For example, before the pandemic, the number of out-patients who were waiting for a first appointment had reduced by more than 28 per cent; over the same period, the number of out-patients who were waiting more than 12 weeks had fallen by more than 30 per cent. We were seeing an increase in the number of in-patients and day case treatments that were carried out. The pandemic clearly had an impact. At the start of the pandemic, we paused all but the most urgent treatments on the NHS, so the health service here, as in other countries, has to recover and catch up. That is what it is doing. We are starting to see some tentative signs of progress and we will continue to support the NHS.

The report by the Royal College of Radiologists is an important piece of work. Let me first set some context, because it is important. Since the Government took office, there has been a 95 per cent increase in the consultant oncologist workforce and a 63 per cent increase in the consultant radiologist workforce. As the report acknowledges, recruitment in those professions is challenging, nationally and globally, and it has to be said that Brexit makes it more challenging, but we are working with health boards on new approaches to maximise the capacity.

The report by the Royal College of Radiologists also says that the increasing use of imaging networks in Scotland is

“going from strength to strength”.

The challenges are inescapable, given what we have lived through in these past two years, but the Government continues to get on with supporting the NHS to recover and deliver for patients.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister does not like Opposition politicians to state that the Covid pandemic cannot be blamed for everything. Therefore, will she listen to the president of the Royal College of Radiologists, Jeanette Dickson, who said that the pandemic had not caused the shortages but had laid bare the shortages that were there before and that it had exacerbated them because of diagnostic backlogs?

That is from clinicians who are speaking to the Government right now and saying, “Don’t use these excuses—these are clearly problems that have built up for years and years”.

Last winter, the NHS battled from crisis to crisis. Our ambulance service and A and E departments struggled so much with patient demand that our United Kingdom armed forces had to step in. This year, we are not even close to winter, yet the situation is far worse. Scottish patients are being sent to England for treatment that they cannot get here. The First Minister looks puzzled. Well, we have spoken to Alan Turner, a 70-year-old from Kelso. He was referred for a knee replacement in October. He was told that he would have to wait up to three years to get his knee replacement on the NHS in Scotland or he could go to England for private treatment, paid for by Scotland’s NHS. Reluctantly, he agreed to travel south, and he was successfully operated on. Then, when he returned to Scotland, he tried to get essential aftercare and physiotherapy locally, but he was told, for months, that he could not receive them.

Alan is now back to square 1. He cannot even bend his knee. He will need to endure the painful wait for treatment all over again. Although it is welcome that we can rely on services across the UK in times of need, should people such as Alan have to go to England for treatment in the first place?

The First Minister

Obviously, I am happy to look into individual cases, but, in general terms, that is a mischaracterisation of the position. I again point out to Douglas Ross that, although I do not shy away from the challenges in NHS Scotland, which are my responsibility, waiting times are worse in England than they are in Scotland and accident and emergency waiting times are worse in England than they are in Scotland. Furthermore, our A and E departments, which Douglas Ross mentioned, are the best performing of any in the UK, although their performance does need to improve.

I will come to Douglas Ross’s specific point. When someone waits too long for treatment on the NHS, if it is possible for NHS Scotland to access treatment in the independent sector, at NHS Scotland’s expense, it will do that in the interest of the patient. There are agreements in place between Scotland and other parts of the UK for more specialist treatment, and those work in both directions. However, from the information that Douglas Ross has shared—I am happy to look at any more information that is available—the patient did not go to NHS England for treatment; instead, we paid for treatment in the independent sector so that they were treated more quickly than they would have been otherwise. That is what happens while we continue to invest in the improvement of waiting times in NHS Scotland.

We will continue to address those challenges, to invest and to support record numbers of staff in our national health service. We will get on with that job.

Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. When Nicola Sturgeon became First Minister, 6,200 children and young people were on a mental health treatment waiting list. Of those, 25 per cent were waiting for longer than the target of 18 weeks, and 221 of them had been waiting for more than a year. Now, more than 10,000 are on a waiting list, 44 per cent have been waiting for more than 18 weeks and more than 1,300 have been waiting for more than a year.

Those failures have consequences. Here is just one. A mother contacted me about her son. He was diagnosed with autism 10 months ago but was told that he would have to wait to see a psychiatrist before medication could be prescribed. He is still waiting. In that time, his condition has worsened and he is begging for the medication to, in his words, “sort out my head”. He is eight years old. First Minister, why does an eight-year-old have to suffer with no support for almost a year?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

They should not have to, and I am not going to say that that is acceptable. However, again, in mental health treatment, as in the national health service more generally, we are investing to support health boards to deliver treatment and catch up with the impact of the pandemic.

We are seeing signs of improvement and I will, again, cite the most recent statistics, which were published just this week. In the most recent quarter, the highest-ever recorded number of children and young people started treatment in child and adolescent mental health services. That was 7.7 per cent up on the number in the previous quarter and it was a 20 per cent increase on the same quarter in the previous year. There was also an increase in the number of CAMHS patients starting treatment within 18 weeks of referral.

There is still a considerable amount of work to do, but the investment and reforms that we are making within mental health services are starting to deliver that improvement.

We have also increased investment. Since 2019-20, we have increased specific expenditure on CAMHS by almost £80 million, which is a 14 per cent increase. Overall expenditure on mental health services has risen by almost 9 per cent.

These are tough challenges—nobody says otherwise. As much as we would all love to, we cannot magic away the impact of the pandemic. We are supporting the health service to recover from the pandemic so that more patients can be seen more quickly, and that work will continue with the focus that it needs and deserves.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

As much as the First Minister might want to blame the pandemic, she cannot blame it for this one. This happened before Covid. Let me give her the stats.

Between November 2014 and March 2020, waiting lists increased by more than 5,000, the number of people who were waiting for more than 18 weeks more than trebled, and the number who waited for more than a year increased from just over 200 to almost 1,000—before Covid-19.

However, those statistics do not show how broken the system is. I have been contacted by another mother whose son was seen after waiting 18 months. His treatment made a difference, but it ended in June last year. His condition started to deteriorate by August, and he was put back on the waiting list. Despite reporting suicidal thoughts, he is still waiting 11 months on. After waiting for months already, why does a 14-year-old who has been referred, who has been seen and who is now reporting suicidal thoughts have to start again from the beginning?

The First Minister

I am not going to comment on individual cases, although I am always happy to look at them if they are sent to me.

On the treatment that young people are entitled to expect when they come forward to CAMH services, one of the other things that has been done recently is the publication of the national CAMH service specification, which sets out clear levels of service, and is backed by £40 million of additional investment. We are investing in more staff and reforming the way in which mental health services for young people work. When young people need specialist services, those services should be available to them, which is why the improvements that I talked about in my earlier answer do not go far enough but are important. We are also building up more community-based services so that fewer young people need to be referred to specialist services. For example, we have supported the employment of counsellors in all secondary schools to support young people through early intervention.

We will continue to take steps to invest in and reform mental health services so that they become more preventative and operate on an earlier intervention basis.

Anas Sarwar is right. I have stood here on many occasions and talked about these issues, and we were seeing significant challenges, particularly in mental health, before the pandemic. That is why much of the investment that I have talked about has been made. Part of it is that, as the stigma of mental ill-health reduces, more and more young people are coming forward for help. We should encourage and be positive about that, but it makes it all the more important that the investment and reforms that I am talking about continue, and that is what will happen.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The two cases that I cited are not just individual cases; they demonstrate a wider systemic problem. If mental health services are to be taken seriously, we need reform of the referral and triage system, we need a mental health professional in every general practice, and young people in every primary and secondary school need to have access to face-to-face services. Those are solutions, but all that the First Minister has done year after year—and again today—

is offer warm words.

In 2015, Nicola Sturgeon said that waiting times were too long. In 2016, she said that there were far too many children whose needs were unmet. In 2017, she said that long waits were unacceptable. In 2018, she said that there was more work to do. In 2019, she said again that long waits were unacceptable. In 2020, she admitted that there had not been enough preventative and early intervention services before Covid. In 2021, she again said that long waits are always unacceptable, and we have heard the exact same script all over again today. Why does Nicola Sturgeon think that it is acceptable to use the same hollow words year after year for eight years while nothing changes, families are left to suffer, and kids are left to pick up the pieces on their own?

The First Minister

That is not the case. What we see with mental health treatment is more people coming forward for treatment. More people are being seen for treatment, but we are building services.

Anas Sarwar has put forward what he describes as solutions, but he has not mentioned anything today that is not already being done. For example, right now, we are recruiting 800 additional mental health workers for accident and emergency departments, general practitioner practices, police station custody suites and prisons. We are funding 1,000 additional staff in community mental health to build resilience there and to ensure that every GP practice has access to a mental health and wellbeing service. We are recruiting 320 additional staff in child and adolescent mental health services. The number of CAMHS staff is already at a record high.

All of that is being done. More people are coming forward, but more people are being treated. Anas Sarwar has glossed over the fact that I mentioned in my first answer, which is that, in the figures for the most recent quarter that were published this week, a record high number of children and young people were seen by CAMH services. Progress is being made because of the investments that we are making and the policies that we are introducing.

Is there much more work to be done? Absolutely—which is why we are going to get on and do it.

The Presiding Officer

We move to constituency and general supplementaries. I call Kenneth Gibson.

Bus Services (Ayrshire)

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Yesterday, Stagecoach announced plans to withdraw the X34 and X36 bus services from Ardrossan to Glasgow via Beith from 17 July. The loss of that vital link means that Beith, a town of 6,000 with no railway station, will be left entirely without a bus service to Glasgow.

That out-of-the-blue decision will detrimentally affect the livelihoods of many constituents who are wholly dependent on the bus for travel to work, hospitals and higher education, or to access facilities and amenities that are available only in a city, while increasing the social isolation of people who visit other parts of Ayrshire. Stagecoach’s decision comes in a week when North Ayrshire Council’s new Scottish National Party—

The Presiding Officer

Can I have a question, please, Mr Gibson?

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Okay, then—I will go straight to the question. What steps will the First Minister take to ensure that Stagecoach, which received £88.2 million of taxpayers’ money last year, reverses its short-sighted and hugely damaging decision, which will also adversely impact on the Scottish Government’s policy of encouraging the use of public transport?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The issues that Kenny Gibson raises are important for people in Ayrshire, and he is right to raise them. I am disappointed to hear that Stagecoach is withdrawing the services that he mentioned, and I encourage it to look again at that. Of course, Stagecoach is a private company and it takes such decisions on a commercial basis, but the Scottish Government supports the network with almost £100 million through the network support grant, which includes the provision of support to Stagecoach for local bus services. The Government also provides funding to local authorities to subsidise socially necessary bus services.

Therefore, I encourage Stagecoach and Strathclyde Partnership for Transport to work together to ensure that connectivity is protected in the area in question, for all the very good reasons that Kenny Gibson outlined.

Freeports

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Bids to be one of the two Scottish freeports are starting to fly in, and more are imminent. Those could herald a huge economic boost as we look to recover from the pandemic.

However, thanks to the dither and delay of the Scottish Government, we are significantly behind the rest of the United Kingdom, especially the likes of Redcar and Thames. Does the First Minister agree that the freeports project shows what can be achieved when both of Scotland’s Governments work collaboratively? Does she welcome the UK Government’s injection of £52 million to ensure that such projects get going in Scotland?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I hate to be the one to break it to Liam Kerr, but had we gone with the UK Government’s timescale on the issue, we would have had significantly less money to invest in green ports in Scotland. It is only because of the negotiation of the Scottish Government, and Kate Forbes in particular, that we are getting funding on a par with the funding that freeports in England are getting, and that we are able to have environmental considerations and, crucially—I know that the Tories do not particularly like this—fair work considerations as part of the green port model in Scotland.

After a lot of work on the Scottish Government’s part, we have come to an agreement with the UK Government, and that process is now under way.

Abortion Clinics

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

The intimidating behaviour witnessed outside the Sandyford clinic in Glasgow appears to be escalating. On 12 May, the First Minister offered support to councils that would introduce bylaws to establish buffer zones at abortion clinics. On 13 May, after asking what Glasgow City Council could do in that regard to address the escalating issues, I was told to direct my inquiries to the relevant ministerial working group.

It appears that local and national Government are at an impasse. I am aware that long-term planning is under way, but we need solutions in the short term to protect these women. If the Scottish Government believes that this is the only publicly available legal option—and it is only an option—will it reiterate in writing its offer of support to councils and will it do so before the summit later this summer?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I will do that very openly today. I am happy to put that in writing as well, but this is a pretty public way of doing it.

There are legal complexities to this and it does not help anyone for me to pretend that there are not. Those are complexities that local authorities and national Government want to work through. It would be my preference to be able to legislate nationally, in order to have a consistency of approach. We know that a forthcoming Supreme Court case, sparked by legislation in Northern Ireland, will undoubtedly have an impact on the legal framework here, but I am very clear in what I want to do.

In the meantime, I want to work with local authorities to see what more can be done to protect women accessing sexual health services, including abortion services. I find what is happening outside hospitals and outside the Sandyford completely and utterly unacceptable. Let me make that clear.

The summit that I have committed to convening will happen this month. It will bring together a range of interests including local authorities and the police. They, of course, operate independently, but there is legislation around antisocial behaviour that may have an impact or relevance here.

I repeat my commitment to finding solutions as quickly as possible. Lastly, I repeat my call to those who want to protest against abortion to come and do that outside this Parliament where the laws are made and to leave women alone and stop trying to intimidate them.

Economic Growth

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

Forecasts this week from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development have shown that the United Kingdom is set to have the lowest growth of any economy in the G20, apart from sanctioned Russia. That is a direct result of a Tory Brexit and will have a regrettable direct impact on Scotland, given that the majority of key economic levers reside with Westminster.

Does the First Minister share my concern about UK Government mismanagement and will our independence prospectus help the public to understand why it is critical that those economic levers are controlled by Scotland for the benefit of Scotland?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I do, and I completely understand why the Tories are shifting so uncomfortably in their seats right now. We knew last week that, largely because of the folly of Brexit, the UK already had the highest rate of inflation of all G7 countries—I think that the rate of inflation in the UK is about double the rate of inflation in France right now. As of this week, we have the quite unbelievable situation of the OECD forecast suggesting that economic growth in the UK next year will be the lowest in OECD countries, with the sole exception of Russia, which right now is rightly subject to global sanctions.

That is the impact of Brexit, and the impact for Scotland of being part of the UK. If the Tories want to argue that that is the union dividend, all I can say is, “Good luck with that.” Rather than being subject to Westminster control, we can choose a better future as an independent, outward-looking country with power over the full range of economic levers to build a better Scotland. The prospectus for an independent Scotland will set out the deficiencies of being governed by Westminster and will point to small independent countries across Europe that, with the powers of independence, are doing so much better than the UK. That should be the inspiration for Scotland.

Resource Spending Review (Impact on Crime)

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Yesterday, we heard yet again about the impact of the Scottish National Party’s financial incompetence. It seems appropriate to ask this question following the previous one. Public services face drastic spending cuts in areas including education, local authorities and the police. Does the First Minister agree with the Scottish Police Federation that the spending review has been good for criminals?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

No, I do not. Of course, this Government has supported more police officers, and we have one of the lowest rates of recorded crime in this country since, I think, 1974, with a 41 per cent reduction in recorded crime since this Government took office.

I am delighted that the Tories keep getting up in this chamber and elsewhere to talk about public spending, because it gives me the opportunity to remind them, the Parliament and everybody across Scotland that the amount of money that this Parliament and this Government have to spend is largely decided by Tories at Westminster. That is what is wrong with the situation. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

The First Minister

This year, we have a budget that is lower in real terms by more than 5 per cent and is projected to continue to be constrained, notwithstanding the rate of inflation hitting 10 per cent. The sooner this Parliament and this Government are in charge of their own finances and we get them out of the hands of Tories at Westminster, with independence, the better.

Scottish Personal Assistant Employers Network (Funding)

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Funding for the Scottish Personal Assistant Employers Network has been withdrawn by the SNP Government. This is the organisation that helps disabled people to pay for their personal assistants, who provide care and support for disabled people to enable them to retain their independence. The immediate consequence of this closure, which is happening today, is that more than 500 personal assistants will not be getting paid this week.

I have seen the emails between the Government and the organisation and I am appalled, frankly, at the lack of understanding by the minister and his officials. No alternative has been suggested, and this crisis for disabled people is entirely the fault of this Government. It has the power to do something about it. It is about independence—the independence of disabled people in Scotland. What urgent action will the First Minister take to halt this impending crisis?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I have become aware of the issue today, and I am asking Kevin Stewart, the relevant minister, to meet the organisation as a matter of urgency. There are a number of complexities here, which I will not go into now, but I want to see a solution found, and the best way to move things forward is to facilitate that discussion as quickly as possible.

Attainment Gap

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

3. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on work to close the attainment gap. (S6F-01193)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Scottish Government remains committed to tackling the poverty-related attainment gap. That is evidenced, of course, by our increased investment of £1 billion in the Scottish attainment challenge, which is up by £250 million from the previous parliamentary session. Progress is being made. We can see that in, for example, the record high proportion of full-time, first-degree entrants to university coming from the 20 per cent most deprived areas of Scotland in 2020-21.

There is, however, more to do. The challenge has been exacerbated by the pandemic, which is why we continue to support headteachers through pupil equity funding, and it is why we are funding all 32 local authorities to develop strategic approaches, including in setting their own aims for progress.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The First Minister stated in 2015:

“excellence in education is essential to our prosperity, competitiveness, wellbeing and to our overall success as a nation.”

Despite that laudable ambition, however, her Government’s spending review last week cut education spending by 5 per cent in real terms. Spending on children and families is set to be slashed in real terms by £15 million, spending on skills and training by £23 million and spending on higher education and student support by £30 million. Has the First Minister completely abandoned her promise to make education her top priority?

The First Minister

No.

Before I come on to what this Government is doing, let me remind the member what the calculation of real terms depends on. It is the rate of inflation that determines whether something is increasing or decreasing in real terms. I remind her that, this year, the total Scottish Government budget has declined by more than 5 per cent in real terms.

The rate of inflation in the UK is, of course, thanks to the UK Government’s policy decisions, including Brexit, the highest of any G7 country and double the rate of inflation in France. Perhaps a bit of self-reflection would not go amiss on the part of the Conservatives.

The spending review is not a budget. It allocates over the next few years the funding that we have available. Do I hope that that funding envelope increases? Yes, I do. Again, however, unfortunately, that depends on decisions that are taken by the United Kingdom Government. It is not my choice that this Parliament is dependent on Westminster decisions, but the choice of unionists across this chamber. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

The First Minister

Let me come back to education. Education budgets have been increasing.

My final point in this context—the most important point—is that we are increasing the funding for the Scottish attainment challenge to £1 billion, which is up by £250 million from the amount that we invested in the previous parliamentary session. That is the commitment; that commitment remains; and that commitment is strong, notwithstanding the hurdles that are put in our way by the Tories at Westminster.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

In 2015, with a tear in her eye, the First Minister said that she wanted a

ll young people to have the “same advantage” as she had. She put her “neck on the line” for education. Now, the word barely passes her lips.

The First Minister promised to substantially eliminate the attainment gap in a decade. Now, her Government says that it would be “top-down” and “arbitrary” to set such a date. We have the First Minister setting a date and the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills saying that it would be wrong to do so. The Government is all over the place on education. Young people want to know why the First Minister has given up on them and on closing the attainment gap by 2026.

The First Minister

We have not done so. Let me quote the manifesto commitment at the 2016 election, which said that the Scottish Government would support the substantial closure of the attainment gap by 2026. I stand by that. That remains the policy and the objective of the Government.

We are seeing progress.

I am always mindful of the fact that I was the first member of my family to go to university. I am particularly mindful of that when a Liberal Democrat questions me, because I benefited from free tuition, which this Government continues to protect and on which the Liberal Democrats have a shameful record.

That is why, although there is still work to do, I am so proud of the fact that we are meeting our targets and increasing the numbers of those from the most deprived communities who go to university—something that the Commissioner for Fair Access described last week as an “unambiguous success”. We will continue to get on with the job, building on the progress—

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

A “success”?

The First Minister

Willie Rennie questions that, but that was

how

the independent Commissioner for Fair Access described our achievements in access to university by young people from the most deprived communities.

School Meals

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

4. To ask the First Minister, in light of reported findings from the children’s charity, Aberlour, that over £1 million is owed in school meal debt, whether the Scottish Government will provide an update on its plans to expand universal free school meal provision in order to support families struggling with the cost of living crisis. (S6F-01208)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I am aware of the Aberlour report, which indicates that more than £1 million is owed across Scotland in school meal debt, although the data in the report is incomplete and is from December last year. I have asked Scottish Government officials to look more deeply into the issue

.

Scotland’s offer of universal free school meals—at this stage, to all primary 1 to 5 pupils and those in special schools—is the most extensive universal offer in the United Kingdom, and it provides to families support of around £400 per pupil. In addition, we have continued to support eligible families during school holidays and we will work with local authority partners over the coming months in preparation for the planned further expansion of free school meals.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

At this time of rising costs, it is concerning that families of school pupils are being chased for debts by councils. Does the First Minister agree that local authorities should write off that debt?

The First Minister

Households across the country are facing a Tory-exacerbated cost of living crisis that is pushing up food prices, and we know that those on the lowest incomes are hardest hit. I am deeply uncomfortable—as any decent person should be—with families being pursued for debt for school meals, especially in the economic climate that exists right now. I am therefore very sympathetic to calls for that debt to be written off. Part of what I have asked officials to do is to look at that.

It should be said that local authorities usually write off school meal debt for families. However, as I have said, I have asked Scottish Government officials to talk with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities about what more can be done. Local authorities also have the flexibility to offer free school meals to families who do not meet eligibility criteria but are experiencing financial hardship, and I encourage anyone who thinks that they have become eligible for free school meals to apply as soon as possible.

Schools (Restraint of Children)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

5. To ask the First Minister what changes have been made since the 2018 report by the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland regarding concerns about the restraint of children in schools. (S6F-01189)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We are working closely with partners, including the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, through the physical intervention working group to develop new human rights-based guidance to address the concerns that are raised in the report and to minimise the use of restraint and seclusion in schools. I can advise members that we will consult on draft guidance later this month.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Replies to freedom of information requests suggest that, in the past year, 3,000 children have been restrained in schools. Without statutory regulation, there is no need for local authorities to report or monitor restraint, and there is no statutory training, even for restraint that involves face-down restraint of young children in schools and care settings. Will the First Minister review the Government’s approach of simply providing guidance? Will she agree to meet me, families and campaigners to take forward those changes?

The First Minister

I am happy to ask the relevant minister to meet Miles Briggs, campaigners and families.

I will make a couple of points, which I hope will be helpful. First, I am sure that we all agree that restraint and seclusion should only ever be used as an absolute last resort to prevent harm, and only when they are in the overall best interests of the child or young person.

Secondly, as I said in my original answer, we are currently preparing to consult on draft guidance. We will do that later this month. However—I hope that this is helpful—we are committed to looking further at the options to place that guidance on a statutory basis, particularly if the guidance does not have the desired effect, although I hope that it will make a difference. We will not rule out legislation, and we will actively consider the options for that.

Displaced Ukrainians (Supersponsor Scheme)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

6. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on the Scottish Government’s supersponsor scheme for displaced Ukrainians. (S6F-01203)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

As of today, there have been 12,861 applications for a visa with a Scottish sponsor, more than 11,500 visas have been issued, and around 4,200 displaced Ukrainians with a Scottish sponsor have now arrived in the United Kingdom. Some 2,035 of those have an individual sponsor, and 2,236 have the Scottish Government as supersponsor.

In partnership with local government and third sector partners, we have established a network of welcome hubs with access to meals, accommodation and support for anyone who arrives here. They have now triaged more than 2,100 people. A national matching service that is being delivered by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is working hard to find longer-term accommodation, using all options, including the generous offers of accommodation that have been made by the public.

A national response has been developed and delivered at pace. We will, of course, continue to ensure that all those who are arriving are treated with compassion and care.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

It continues to be the case that local authorities that welcome displaced people through the Ukraine family scheme receive no funding at all from the UK Government, and even the £10,500 per person under the homes for Ukraine scheme is not much, considering all the provisions that need to be put in place to support those who are seeking refuge. Will the First Minister urge the UK Government to urgently put in place appropriate financial support for all local authorities, no matter what scheme people have arrived through, to ensure that those who are settling here can have all their needs met?

The First Minister

Yes, that is an important and serious issue, and there have been acknowledgements from UK Government ministers—principally Michael Gove—that those are serious issues. Neil Gray and I have repeatedly raised the issue, and we will continue to do so in the strongest terms.

The £10,500 per person tariff does not provide adequate funding for local authorities and public services. That tariff is not even provided to local authorities for people who arrive through the family visa route, and I do not think that that is acceptable.

Our local authorities and public services are supporting people, regardless of their visa route. There is a clear need to provide appropriate funding that reflects the unique impact of the implementation of the various UK Government schemes on public services and local communities.

The matter is reserved, of course, but we take our responsibility seriously, and the Scottish Government wants to do as much as it can. The Scottish Government has therefore committed £11.2 million to local authorities to support resettlement and integration and the refurbishment of properties.

Victims of Rape and Domestic Abuse

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

7. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government will take to ensure that victims of rape and domestic abuse are not retraumatised as a result of plans to allow them to formally meet those who harmed them. (S6F-01196)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We recently launched two hubs to support the national roll-out of restorative justice services, which enable safe—and voluntary—facilitated contact between people who have been harmed by crime and those responsible for such harm. However, I stress that such contact is voluntary and occurs only where the victim of crime wants it to happen. It is important to note that the needs of people who have been harmed are at the heart of the process. If they choose to have such contact, they will set the pace at all stages and can stop the process at any time.

I recognise that victims and survivors in sensitive cases involving sexual harm and coercive control may request access to restorative justice. We are working with partners to design services to respond appropriately to such requests. A trauma-informed and comprehensive risk framework will be created for such cases, and will have at its centre the individual needs and safety of the person who has been harmed.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister is right to reiterate the words of Sandy Brindley of Rape Crisis Scotland, who has said

that no one should ever feel that they have to have such contact or that they have been pressurised in any way.

I believe that we must improve experiences of the justice system for victims of sexual violence, which disproportionately affects women and girls, and I know that the First Minister feels strongly about that, too. The Criminal Justice Committee has heard from survivors of rape and sexual assault, who said that they felt as though they were being treated as the guilty party. Long delays in the current court system mean that they are often left in the dark as to what happens in their court cases.

Does the First Minister think that more support should be given to victims, such as offering them legal advice before they go to court? Will she consider a proposal for—or even enter into dialogue on—a means-tested independent legal representation scheme in the pre-trial period for victims of rape and survivors of serious sexual violence, as a way of radically altering their experiences?

The First Minister

Yes, I will consider that. Issues on independent legal representation of victims of rape and sexual violence in the criminal justice system have been raised in particular contexts in the past—for example, where information about the history of the victim has been requested as part of the court process. Those are important issues.

I agree with Pauline McNeill. Sadly, it is simply a statement of fact that, even in our society today, many survivors of rape and sexual assault are often left feeling undersupported and as though they are somehow the guilty parties. That is partly down to attitudes in society. Right now, there is also an impact from backlogs in the court system because of the pandemic, which is why we are working hard to address those.

We are already funding organisations to deliver the equally safe initiatives. We have a duty to consider anything that we can do to better support people who have been affected by such crimes, so I will consider Pauline McNeill’s specific proposal. As for the subject matter of her original question, I again reiterate the voluntary nature of such contact. As I have certainly raised in Government, it is one thing to say that a process is voluntary, but we must ensure that even offering people that option is not heard by victims as somehow suggesting that they are expected to or are being pressured to do that, so the way in which that is implemented will be really important.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s question time.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The First Minister might not be aware that Kevin Stewart is ill with Covid and is self-isolating. I am sure that members will wish him a speedy recovery. Will the First Minister therefore ensure that, in his absence, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care meets representatives of SPAEN today?

The Presiding Officer

As Ms Baillie will be aware, that is not a point of order for me. However, her point is now on the record.

NHS Staff Recruitment and Retention

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I ask those leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so as quickly and as quietly as possible, because business is resuming.

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-04464, in the name of Rhoda Grant, on national health service staff recruitment and retention. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes the reported ongoing issues with staff recruitment in NHS Highland, while it attempts to expand its services by providing a National Treatment Centre in Inverness and to support NHS Grampian by providing obstetric services for Moray; considers that the Highlands and Islands has a world-class university in the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI); understands that UHI previously carried out successful training of midwifery staff for the Highlands and Islands region to meet staffing demand as part of a two-year pilot in response to a specific workforce need; further understands that funding for this programme has now been moved to Edinburgh Napier University to cover the whole of Scotland; notes the view that NHS staff should be trained close to home in order to enhance recruitment and retention of staff, and further notes the call, therefore, for the Scottish Government to develop training for NHS staff at the University of the Highlands and Islands.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the members who signed my motion, allowing this debate to take place. I also thank all the individuals and organisations that have provided briefings—far too many to name, which shows the level of interest.

Staffing issues are common throughout the NHS—indeed, last weekend, in a Royal College of Nursing survey, 90 per cent of nurses said that their latest shift had been understaffed. Currently, across Scotland, 6,209 nursing and midwifery posts are vacant. In NHS Highland, that figure is 296, which is 8 per cent of all nursing and midwifery posts in the board area.

When there are staff shortages across Scotland, we in the Highlands bear the brunt of them, because it is easier for people to change their careers without that impacting on their families when they live in the central belt. In the north, we need to make it attractive not just for the person to move but for their whole family to be uprooted. Therefore, it is a lot harder for us to recruit.

Added to that is a shortage of affordable housing, local services and public transport. Therefore, it is no surprise that waiting times in NHS Highland are among the longest in Scotland.

NHS Highland is attempting to recruit from all over the world. It is not for the want of trying that it finds itself desperately short staffed. Portree hospital’s urgent care unit is closed more often than it is open. Home care services and care homes are also desperately short staffed. The new Broadford hospital, which was opened by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care only weeks ago, cannot be fully utilised because of a lack of staff. Dentistry in Moray is so dire that NHS Grampian is requiring dentists in Aberdeen to step in and help. Dunbar hospital’s minor injuries unit only recently reopened as there were staffing challenges due to staff being moved to support the Covid response.

Staff are totally burnt out by the pandemic. Some are off sick with stress or other mental health issues, and some are leaving the profession altogether or taking early retirement.

I turn to maternity care specifically. Since Caithness general hospital’s maternity service was downgraded, women whose births are likely to involve complications have been sent, usually by road, to Inverness—more than 100 miles away. This week, a petitioner made the point that that is like a mother in Edinburgh travelling to Newcastle for maternity care.

At the time of the downgrade of the Caithness maternity unit, clinicians in Inverness expressed concern about staffing in Inverness and whether they would cope with the additional numbers. Members of the local community in Caithness were obviously concerned about the long distance that women needed to travel to access those services. Risk assessments of the service in Caithness were carried out due to the lack of paediatric support, but nobody has risk assessed the journey from Caithness to Raigmore hospital in Inverness.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I share Rhoda Grant’s sentiments about the unacceptable distance that expectant mothers are expected to travel from Caithness to Raigmore. She will recognise that a lot of work has gone into addressing a similar situation in Moray, and a solution has largely been found. However, no such solution has been found to the Caithness situation, nor has any Government time been devoted to addressing it. Does she agree that that is a crying shame?

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

I do, and I have written repeatedly to the cabinet secretary to ask him to visit and speak to people in the Caithness community. I understand that he is going to do that, which is extremely welcome.

As Alex Cole-Hamilton said, there is the same situation in Dr Gray’s hospital in Elgin, which is part of NHS Grampian. Again, the plan is to reroute complex cases to Raigmore hospital in Inverness. However, this time, clinicians, management and the community know that that cannot happen without additional staffing and investment at Raigmore. Despite that, it appears to be a fait accompli.

We read in the news at the weekend about two cases—one in Moray and one in the south of Scotland—in which babies were born by the roadside. Those births were deemed to be too complex to be supported in the local community midwife-led unit, yet it is somehow safer for those babies to be born by the roadside without any support. I really do not believe that.

The risk to mothers and babies that is created by that system is enormous, especially in the winter months, and it puts added pressure on paramedics, which is also unacceptable. I beg the cabinet secretary to take that risk on board, because it should not take a death to prove it.

We need to act. We need to train more staff in all disciplines but, crucially, in maternity care, obstetrics and paediatrics. In the Highlands and Islands, we have our wonderful, world-renowned university—a new university that is at the cutting edge of delivering education and research differently. It used to run a fast-track midwifery course, which was open to nurses, was held close to home and allowed them to enhance their training in midwifery. The course was building steadily and would have provided the maternity workforce of the future, albeit that it was drawing from the already stretched nursing workforce. However, as so often happens, the course was centralised in Edinburgh Napier University.

In my opening remarks, I alluded to the difficulty that that creates. People are reluctant to uproot their families to further their careers. Therefore, to grow our workforce, we need to provide training close to home. Evidence from NHS Education for Scotland highlighted that midwives are more likely to remain in the area where they were trained. I am sure that the same goes for other disciplines.

The current situation also adds costs to our health boards. Employing locum or bank staff is much more expensive than employing a full-time member of staff. The use of locums also creates issues for patients, because there is very little continuity for them.

There are also issues in how we train our professionals. We focus on team working within specialities. In rural areas, we need generalists who are able to turn their hand to treating a number of conditions, and they need to be able to work with very little support. We currently recognise a depth of knowledge through career progression and salary, but those with a breadth of knowledge find their skills unrecognised, both professionally and financially.

Although I have based my points on maternity services, the same is true in other disciplines. Mental health services in Caithness are at breaking point, with tragic consequences. General practitioners are handing back their practices to health boards, and we have some of the longest waiting lists in Scotland. The situation is untenable.

I urge the cabinet secretary to act. Any further delays will lead to loss of life.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I am pleased to take part in this important debate, and I congratulate Rhoda Grant on securing it. I will start by agreeing with her that there are many complex challenges in our NHS, particularly in relation to recruitment and retention in Scotland and across the rest of the United Kingdom.

The Covid-19 pandemic systematically changed the way that we provide healthcare in Scotland, and there is no doubt that the pandemic exacerbated pre-existing challenges in health and social care. It caused staff to change their working patterns and practices as they adapted to enormous challenges and hugely demanding environments. It is self-evident that that will have an impact on recruitment and retention, and what we do to address those issues is important. We should also bear in mind the combined impact of the pandemic and Brexit, which, it must be accepted, has created massive barriers to the recruitment of staff in our health service.

The challenges that Rhoda Grant’s motion cites are not confined to the Highlands and Islands; we have our own challenges in Aberdeen Donside and across NHS Grampian. Continued workforce supply challenges, alongside high levels of vacancies—particularly in medical specialties and in nursing and midwifery—and a recent increase in the number of vacancies in allied health professions, have resulted in an overreliance on supplementary staffing across our NHS, including in Aberdeen. The currently available supply of staff is insufficient to meet the ever-increasing demands on our health boards.

However, there are opportunities to look at alternative supply pathways. Participation in further international recruitment initiatives—using the networks of current NHS staff—continued development roles, links with further education, apprenticeship programmes and a review of all agency placements will be key to making the changes that are necessary to address the supply challenges.

How will that be achieved, particularly for NHS Grampian? The Scottish Government must continue to support the board to extend the workforce market to a wider range of potential applicants. We must utilise current supply pathways, while seeking to widen those routes through innovative approaches, and implement an easy and intuitive process that encourages individuals to apply for posts and improves candidates’ experiences of recruitment.

That approach must invest in marketing the brand of NHS Grampian by offering a range of jobs and career opportunities, and it must create a service model that is service based and influenced by the diverse resource, capacity and skills of the existing and future workforce. That model must be applied in a way that uses skills, generates effective teams and is efficient, so that it creates a workforce that is fit for purpose.

In order to ensure retention, the board must be supported to implement the staff governance standards within a culture in which staff and their contributions are valued and listened to, and we must ensure that the current workforce is offered appropriate development opportunities.

Today, I asked the cabinet secretary for a commitment that the board will be supported with those aims and that all action will be taken to ensure sufficient staffing of our valued NHS, which is so important to many constituents across Donside.

I have heard lots of complaints about an ageing workforce being an issue that faces our NHS. However, when I touched base with NHS Grampian ahead of the debate, I learned that it recognises that an ageing workforce presents an opportunity, because staff are highly experienced. I pay tribute to the board for exploring new and innovative ways of working and opportunities for staff who wish to continue working beyond their retirement age. The board fully supports the ageing workforce and, in many cases, provides opportunities for older staff to move into mentoring and senior roles, as well as opportunities for career advancement.

I welcome this debate and the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to support NHS recruitment and retention, and I reiterate my asks of the cabinet secretary.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

NHS staff have played a vital and enduring role during the Covid pandemic. Like all my colleagues in the Parliament, I reiterate my thanks for their efforts and continued resilience as we begin rebuilding from the pandemic.

Jackie Dunbar spoke of an ageing workforce. Actually, the worry is not about their age but about the possibility that the ageing workforce will retire with no one to come in behind them.

I share Rhoda Grant’s concerns that the Scottish National Party Government has yet to adequately support NHS staff in Scotland. We are faced with serious recruitment and retention problems, and not only in the Highlands and Islands. Many of the issues that we see today are the result of failed workforce planning.

The SNP Government is not treating long Covid with the urgency that it requires. The number of people who have suffered for more than a year has doubled in just six months. Across Scotland, it is estimated that more than 150,000 people are suffering from long Covid, and, of those, 64,000 have been experiencing symptoms for more than a year. That is increasing the strain on services and on NHS staff.

The recent workforce plan was insufficient and lacked ambition. The number of unfulfilled registered nursing posts in NHS Scotland continues to grow, which increases pressure on already overworked and exhausted nursing staff. The latest statistics on the nursing workforce, which were published two days ago, show that 9.5 per cent of registered nurse posts in Scotland were vacant as of 31 March 2022. That is a record high. The rate equates to 4,605 unfilled registered nurse posts compared with 4,500 by the end of 2021.

The overall number of vacant nursing and midwifery posts was 6,209 as of 31 March 2022, which was up from 4,495 on the same date in 2021 and was an increase of more than 38 per cent in 12 months. Non-Covid sickness absence in the whole NHS workforce has increased to 5.7 per cent, up from 4.7 per cent on 31 March 2021, which increases the pressure on the whole service.

Colin Poolman, the Royal College of Nursing interim director, said that nurses

“deserve more than to turn up to work shift after shift and be expected to deal with significantly increased demand with fewer and fewer nursing staff.”

I could not agree with him more. Immediate action is required to support staff retention.

To address long-term recruitment issues, we need to take a comprehensive approach to workforce planning for the whole of NHS Scotland—in every profession and at every level. Furthermore, we would remove the cap on the number of funded places for front-line medical students in order to increase the number of home-domiciled students, because we know that they are more likely to continue working in NHS Scotland.

Successive SNP health secretaries have simply failed to adequately address workforce planning in our NHS, and the devastating results are clear for us all to see.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I join others across the chamber in thanking NHS and social care staff for their hard work, and I congratulate Rhoda Grant on securing this debate. She makes a powerful case for training NHS staff as close to home as possible and specifically for training to be provided at the University of the Highlands and Islands. I support her in that call.

I want to talk in more general terms about staff recruitment and retention. The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow summed it up for me when it said that

“there is not enough staff to meet the needs of our patients”,

and that

“the challenges of workforce shortages ... are not new. They existed long before the pandemic and have deteriorated since.”

On Tuesday, NHS workforce statistics were published. They show that 9.5 per cent of registered nurse posts are vacant, which is a record high, while the overall number of vacant nursing and midwifery posts has gone up by 38 per cent to 6,209 in the past 12 months alone. The day before that, the Royal College of Nursing published what was, frankly, a shocking survey that told us that eight out of 10 nurses had patient safety concerns while working on their most recent shift, because they were so understaffed.

Earlier this year, six out of 10 nurses were actively considering leaving their job; at the start of the pandemic, it was three out of 10. The key reasons for leaving included feeling undervalued, being under pressure at work, unsafe staffing levels and low pay. Forty per cent are working beyond their contracted hours, while 67 per cent are too busy to provide the level of care that they would like.

When the Royal College of Midwives surveyed its members, it found that 70 per cent are considering leaving the service. Like the RCN, its members cited the safety of their patients due to the lack of staffing as a very real problem.

Faced with all that pressure, it is little wonder that staff are leaving the NHS.

It is not just nurses. One in five consultants are leaving the NHS well before retirement, citing burnout as one of the key reasons. There is a shortage of allied health professionals and a shortage of GPs, too. In fact, the workload of GPs is enormous and there are simply not enough of them to cope with rising demand. Although I think that we would all welcome the Government’s plan for 800 more GPs, I reflect on the words of Dr Andrew Buist of the British Medical Association, who said:

“training an extra 800 is not the same as getting them into practices where they are needed to improve access to patients.”

Getting workforce planning right is critical, but it will take time, so the retention of existing staff must be an urgent priority for the Government. We need to care for staff so that they can continue to care for us, and that extends beyond their welfare, important though that is. We need to pay them better and to recognise and reward their hard work—and that applies to both health and social care. We also know that the NHS lacks flexibility. Instead of letting 40 years of experience walk out the door, can we not see if we can retain that knowledge and those skills on a part-time basis?

Above all, let us implement the Health and Care (Staffing) Act 2019, which everybody in this Parliament voted for, to ensure that we have safe staffing levels. It has been on the statute book for three years now, and nothing has happened. The cabinet secretary says that he will publish a timetable by the end of June, which is welcome, but a timetable that is vague and which pushes implementation years down the line will simply be unacceptable.

There is a huge crisis coming that has been unfolding for years, and the cabinet secretary is giving the appearance of being asleep at the wheel. I hope that he wakes up before it is too late.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I start by thanking Rhoda Grant for securing parliamentary time for this important debate. I also associate myself with her remarks about the difficulties faced by expectant mothers who travel from Caithness to Raigmore hospital to deliver their babies. It is in nobody’s estimation safer for a baby with complex needs to be born by the side of a road than in the care of a hospital nearer to their home, which should be our aspiration for those families.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I do not disagree with Alex Cole-Hamilton’s comments. However, does he recognise that the decision on Caithness was taken by the health board itself, because of a very tragic case, and that patient safety was at the heart of that decision when it was taken a number of years ago?

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I recognise that. However, the decision was taken a number of years ago, and things have moved on. We need to listen to the community and clinicians and actually make it safer for mothers to deliver their babies close to their homes in Caithness.

I also thank the Royal College of Nursing, which, alongside others, has worked tirelessly to provide the country with the information that we are debating today and which illuminates the current crisis in nursing—and I repeat that it is a crisis. It is unfortunate that the information makes such bleak reading, given that we have been talking about this issue for what feels like years.

The RCN Scotland survey report, which, as we have heard, was released this week, has revealed that awful statistic of 90 per cent of nurses who responded believing that the number of nursing staff on the last shift that they worked was not sufficient to properly meet patients’ needs. Not only is that dangerous for patients, but, as the report highlights, it puts an inordinate amount of stress on staff. They sacrifice their own wellbeing to deliver the care that their patients need, and as a result, 63 per cent of staff in Scotland have said that they feel “exhausted” to the point of negativity by the end of the shift. I would like to highlight that that statistic is only 10 per cent higher than the average UK figure. The daily reality is dire and is, in fact, quickly becoming untenable.

Describing their experience in another recent RCN report, one nurse said:

“One day I walked into my shift, and ... I was on my own in the entire floor. I can’t describe how I felt at the end of that shift, emotional, physically”.

They go on to say:

“Something should be done about the staff shortage and fast otherwise nurses will be forced to leave one by one and the few remaining will die of stress and burnout”.

That reality is particularly stark in remote and island communities.

I think that those words speak for themselves. The reality is that we as a Parliament have passed legislation that should not allow this to happen. In the safe staffing legislation that we passed, we as a Parliament recognised that we cannot allow shifts to proceed in such unsafe ways—and yet still they do. I welcome the fact that the cabinet secretary has finally announced a long-overdue timetable for implementing the legislation, but we have been waiting for three years now. I reiterate the point that I often make that this is not just about head count; we need to be sure that every shift has the right mix of skills and experience to deliver patient care safely.

As the nurse whom I quoted made clear, the unbearable working conditions mean that more and more staff are being lost to the profession. They are forced to give up the job that they love, which potentially puts off people who are considering entering the profession. That will lead inexorably to fewer staff, putting more pressure on current staff and making working conditions worse than ever before. It is a vicious cycle that we need to break.

This is why the Liberal Democrats have called for the establishment of an NHS staff assembly to learn from the lived experience of staff, and I was heartened yesterday to hear Humza Yousaf agree to look seriously at the proposal. It is also why our party has repeatedly called for a burnout prevention strategy, which would implement mental health help for front-line staff and support them in their job. However, that suggestion has been voted down on successive occasions and routinely dismissed by the Government, including in an exchange yesterday, when Humza Yousaf referred to the idea as being just a piece of paper. The problem is that, despite the health secretary telling us repeatedly about the money that is being invested in staff welfare, the Government has yet to produce its own piece of paper saying how that money will be spent on supporting NHS staff. A burnout prevention strategy is exactly what those people need.

The motion also refers to training NHS staff in all areas of Scotland, not just the central belt, which is something that the Liberal Democrats are fully supportive of. This cannot be a postcode lottery. Widespread training programmes are an important step in producing widespread care, which is vital to ensuring our nation’s health.

I will end—you have been very good to me, Presiding Officer—with the words of Pat Cullen, the RCN’s chief executive, who said:

“To those from government listening to my words—we've had enough. The patients and those we care for have had enough.”

It is long overdue that the Government not only listens but acts.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr Cole-Hamilton. I am always good to everybody.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I, too, thank Rhoda Grant for bringing this important motion to the chamber. I echo the points that she has made on the difficulties of recruitment in rural areas, including her area of NHS Highland. Recruitment is a major concern across the NHS, but that concern is definitely heightened in rural areas.

As Rhoda Grant has said, the RCN advised us before the debate that in NHS Highland 224 registered nurse posts—nearly one in 10—are vacant. That situation is reflected in other rural areas. It is a significant cause for concern that the Government ought to take very seriously and act upon.

NHS staff recruitment and retention is an on-going issue that has been debated many times in the chamber and raised repeatedly by nursing trade unions. As I say regularly in the chamber, the Scottish Government cannot take the time to pat itself on the back while vacancies remain high across the country, staff remain under pressure and services continue to be strained.

The Government must consider carefully the ways in which recruitment can be improved, and that must include the training of NHS staff close to home. As someone who covers a rural constituency, I hear time and time again many of the points that were made by Rhoda Grant earlier in the debate. We have first-class university and college facilities across Scotland, and it is important that training programmes are rolled out in our rural areas such as the Highlands and my area of the Borders to ensure that people who wish to enter the healthcare profession can train and then—we hope—take up posts close to home.

Moreover, in our efforts to ensure that care is community based and available locally, we must recruit more people in key areas such as mental health and learning disabilities, as was referenced in the RCN’s briefing, to ensure that such services have the staff to meet demand and can be delivered close to the people who rely on them. That helps patients and staff, both of whom can benefit from having facilities close to home. That is so important in rural areas.

As we know—and as has been mentioned by members across the chamber—recruitment and retention are closely linked. Just last month, at First Minister’s question time, I highlighted discussions with the Unison trade union on how workplace pressures in NHS Borders had led staff to report to the union issues such as staffing levels that are dangerous for both patients and staff and staff not receiving proper rest breaks.

That situation is unacceptable. I know that the Government has acknowledged that and that it says that it will address the issue, but we on the Labour benches have to keep pushing to ensure that the safe staffing legislation is enacted and that the Government takes the issue seriously. Those points have previously been made in the chamber, and we must now start to enact some of that work.

The healthcare workforce gives so much to the community and to our country, but it often feels that it gets so little back. Is it any wonder, therefore, that vacancies remain so high and that staff feel under so much pressure? If we want to recruit and retain a skilled workforce that serves every part of our country, including rural areas, we must start by alleviating some of the barriers to the recruitment of students and addressing the workplace pressures that staff currently face in order to make the healthcare setting an appealing one in which to work.

As Rhoda Grant’s motion makes clear, the Highlands have seen the removal of a key training programme from a local university to the large city of Edinburgh. It is also clear from today’s contributions—and, indeed, from trade unions and NHS workforce briefings—that current workforce pressures are significant and put strain on the ability to deliver the service that patients deserve.

Those two clear issues that are highlighted in the motion and which relate to recruitment and retention can be fixed by bringing training programmes closer to home. For rural areas, that would mean having valued NHS staff close to home who could provide those services. It is a significant point that the cabinet secretary should follow up.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I, too, congratulate Rhoda Grant on introducing the debate. As I think she will recognise, it is not the first time in the past couple of sessions that we have discussed such issues in the chamber.

When my daughter was at university, I had a conversation with her in which she told me that she had decided to change from studying law to studying midwifery. That was a switch—law to midwifery. When we looked at the possibility, we found that there were 10 applications for each available place to study midwifery at college. I raised that with her, but she still wanted to do it. On she went, and she got one of those places.

Having looked at midwifery, I then looked at other medical professions, such as nurses and physios, and found that there were four times as many applications as the number of available places. My colleague Sandesh Gulhane talked about the cap on medical students from domiciles in Scotland, but the fact is that there is no lack of applications from them.

As has been mentioned, when it was previously highlighted that Scotland had a shortfall of 864 GPs, the Government responded by suggesting that a further 800 GPs would be trained over the next decade. However, that failed to take into account GP turnover. Indeed, an Audit Scotland report suggested that, in 10 years, we would still be left with a shortfall of 600 GPs.

Early in my political career, a constituent unfortunately lost a child in childbirth at Crosshouse university hospital, which had an inordinately high number of baby deaths. We managed to get Healthcare Improvement Scotland to carry out a report into the situation, and it discovered that the neonatal unit was 24 staff short. My daughter now works in that neonatal unit, but when she first qualified as a midwife, she could not get a job in Scotland and had to travel to Preston to do three 12-hour shifts before getting the train back up. Fortunately, she now works in the Scottish NHS.

So where is the workforce plan? One issue that I suggest we look at, especially with regard to the lack of GPs and the importance of having Scotland-domiciled students, is the fact that where those students work tends to relate to the postcode that they put on their Universities and Colleges Admissions Service form. I think that that is highlighted in Rhoda Grant’s motion.

One of the issues that we are discussing today is recruitment and retention, but the phrase is the wrong way round. The first thing that we should do is ensure that we retain the staff that we have. If we do not, it will be like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it.

We need to create an environment that our medical staff want to work in. We must take more cognisance of reports of bullying; we must ensure that there is advancement; and we must ensure that the hours and shifts that staff have to work provide a more balanced life. I remember talking five years ago about ensuring that hot meals are available for staff who work evening shifts, which is something that does not always happen.

A more important issue these days is ensuring that mental health support is available for all our healthcare staff. If we want to invest in health services further upstream as part of the prevention agenda, which is my passion, we need a workforce that can deliver them. One of the first things that I said in the chamber was that, to improve the health of our nation, we had to start by looking after the people who look after us. When we discuss recruitment and retention—or, I should say, retention and recruitment—we must ensure that what we actually mean is that we will look after the health of those who look after us, because that will go an awfully long way towards starting to deal with the issues outlined in the motion.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I, too, thank my colleague Rhoda Grant for bringing the debate to the chamber and for highlighting the needs of her constituents, in relation to not just workforce planning but the particular challenges that pertain to the dispersed population of the Highlands. Special accommodation must be made for that population if we are to ensure that our national health service provides for them appropriately.

Unsurprisingly, I want to talk about my constituents and the similar challenges that they face with regard to workforce planning in particular. There are major shortfalls in the numbers of oncology consultants in NHS Tayside, particularly for breast cancer patients. Many of the workforce planning issues that have been raised so far impact on that situation.

I know that the cabinet secretary recognises that workforce planning is a challenge across all of Scotland. A 2020 Scotland workforce census showed that an estimated 18 per cent of consultant clinical oncologists are forecast to retire by 2025. My home city has borne much of the brunt of that challenge. How many patients will have their cancer treatment compromised before there is change on a systemic level in response to that?

During general question time, I confirmed to the cabinet secretary that, in the past couple of weeks, the final breast cancer oncologist has left their employment at Ninewells hospital.

There is a considerable history to the issue. We need a comprehensive workforce plan and, clearly, recruitment is part of the response. However, I am fast coming to the conclusion that a recruitment process alone will not deal with the problem.

When a prospective consultant sees an advert, they research the centre, google its record and speak to colleagues in the international community who are involved in the relevant services. For Dundee, they will find a record of conflict between clinical staff and management, a seriously flawed Health Improvement Scotland report and reports of a culture of bullying, which members have referred to in exchanges in the Parliament this very day. Sandesh Gulhane raised that issue today—I will take his intervention.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Does Michael Marra agree that the secret report must be made public and that we must urge the cabinet secretary to intervene?

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I certainly agree that all documents pertaining to the situation should be put into the public domain. Sandesh Gulhane is referring to a report by the Royal College of Physicians in London that was commissioned in 2019. It is shrouded in conflict of interest issues relating to some of the members who were involved in the production of the report. It seems to have been shelved, but the reason for that has never been entirely clear and open. On this issue, we need full transparency and openness around all publications.

There is a further document that I would like the cabinet secretary to produce, which is the right-of-reply response of clinicians in Dundee to the Health Improvement Scotland report. That should be provided as well.

Only when we deal with the underlying issue will we deal with the fact that we cannot meet the recruitment requirements in the specialism in Dundee. The board of NHS Tayside must step up at long last and perform its legal function in the matter to “challenge rigorously”, according to its own code of corporate governance, the executive officers who are presiding over a chronic situation that will be helped only by full openness and real honesty from all parties.

Labour colleagues asked the First Minister these questions in February 2021, which is 16 months ago. There has been more than a year of obfuscation and denial from the Scottish Government. As late as November 2021, the Deputy First Minister appeared in the chamber in complete denial, saying that to raise the issues was to do a disservice to the women of Tayside.

On 27 January, I advised the chamber—and, seemingly, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care—that further resignations from the service had been tendered. Today, I informed the chamber that there are now no breast cancer oncology specialists in Dundee. The cabinet secretary gave assurances that he

“and other ministerial colleagues have been deeply involved in the issue.”—[

Official Report

, 27 January 2022; c 5.]

I am afraid that that is becoming as much of a concern as a reassurance.

There is a fundamental breakdown of trust. Only full transparency will restore it and the services that the women of Tayside and Dundee need.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank Rhoda Grant for bringing this important debate to the Parliament, and I thank members from around Scotland and across the political spectrum who have contributed. Although I might not agree with all of their points, the substantial points that have been made on recruitment and retention, staffing and workforce planning are important.

I will touch on some of the general points, but I would do a disservice to the debate if I did not touch on some of the key themes and points relating to NHS Highland that Rhoda Grant has raised. Of course, other members are correct: the issues that affect NHS Highland are not unique to the area but are often replicated in remote, rural and island communities. Therefore, I will address some of those more general points, too.

As Rhoda Grant knows, I have been to NHS Highland on a couple of occasions in the past two weeks to open two new hospitals there. I am pleased with that Scottish Government investment. However, Ms Grant is right that, when I visited Badenoch and Strathspey and Broadford hospital in Skye, staff repeatedly raised recruitment and retention with me. She is also correct that the issue is not just about job offers—Jackie Dunbar and other colleagues touched on that point, too—but, as we know, about housing, transport links and education. Again, I will try to touch on some of those points where I can.

Workforce recruitment is key. I will touch on retention issues soon. I recognise that vacancies in particular staff cohorts are far too high. A number of colleagues raised the workforce statistics that have recently been published on nursing vacancies. They will not get a difference of opinion from me suggesting that those vacancies are acceptable, but I put on record and robustly defend the action that we are taking. We are doing our best in an extremely challenging and competitive market to recruit as many qualified nurses and midwives as we possibly can. However, overall, I am very proud of the Government’s workforce record.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that the issue is not just about recruiting current staff but about the numbers of staff in training and that, if we had had a long-term strategy five, six or seven years ago, we would not be in the situation that we are in now?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

A variety of training programmes are under way. In particular, there are training and incentivisation programmes for rural health boards that help to attract people and keep them. I will come to the point about retention in more detail.

I was about to say that we have a proud record of recruitment in the NHS. Since 2006, there has been an increase of almost 30,000 in the number of whole-time-equivalent staff in the NHS. In NHS Highland, which is an area of interest in this debate, the workforce is up by 33.6 per cent, which is higher than the average growth rate across NHS Scotland. The increase in the number of medical and dental consultants is more than 70 per cent. More recent statistics than those from December 2019—which was before the pandemic—show that the increase in the workforce in NHS Highland is 7.8 per cent.

To go back to the point that I made in response to Brian Whittle, we are doing what we can to recruit and retain, particularly in rural health board areas. That includes a golden hello payment to GPs who are new to rural areas and, via a primary care rural fund to support established GPs, our rediscover the joy programme, which we hope to extend to other health board areas.

Rhoda Grant raised more specific challenges, and I take the point that she made about Caithness, which Alex Cole-Hamilton also made. As Rhoda Grant graciously noted, I have agreed to meet the campaigners in Caithness. I will do that this summer, and I will ensure that MSPs are invited to those discussions.

I give the absolute assurance, which I hope that members will take at face value, that the safety of mothers and their unborn children is of paramount importance to all of us. I agree that giving birth in a lay-by is not what any of us would want for our children. We would not want our own family members to be in that position.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

We all agree that giving birth in a lay-by is unsafe. I would be grateful if the cabinet secretary would commit to doing a risk assessment of journey times in emergency situations and, indeed, routine ones.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I will certainly explore how we can do that in a meaningful way.

The point I was about to make is the one that I made in my intervention on Alex Cole-Hamilton, which is that we have to bear in mind that there was a tragic case, and a review of that said that the death was avoidable. That meant that very difficult decisions were taken in Caithness. However, I take Alex Cole-Hamilton’s point that that happened a number of years ago and things should have moved on from there.

Education and training are important, and that point has been raised by almost every member who has spoken. Brian Whittle gave a very personal perspective on it. We are keen to ensure that we can train the workforce in remote, rural and island health boards where possible. That is an important endeavour for the Government.

Members across the chamber will be aware of ScotGEM—the Scottish graduate entry medicine programme—which is Scotland’s first four-year graduate entry medicine programme. It is hosted by the University of St Andrews and the University of Dundee and it went from 55 students in 2018 to 70 students this year. Of particular relevance to NHS Highland is the fact that the ScotGEM programme includes periods of time living and studying in NHS Highland. I have heard from remote, rural and island health boards time and again that if we can get people to live, train or study in those places, we will have a much better chance of retaining them there.

Jackie Dunbar spoke about a more co-ordinated approach across rural health boards. Her points were well made, and I commit to supporting NHS Grampian with its staffing and recruitment. However, I have to say, quite frankly, that at times our recruitment activity can be a bit ad hoc. I am keen to have a more co-ordinated approach, particularly across remote and rural health board areas.

Midwifery training is another key part of Rhoda Grant’s motion. She is concerned about the discontinuation of the pilot at UHI. She will be aware of NHS Education for Scotland’s review of that pilot and midwifery workforce education, which was published in March 2021. She can come back to me if she has any specific points to make on that. The review said that the institutions that are providing training and educational opportunities should continue to do so. That is why, in January of this year, Edinburgh Napier University welcomed students from across Scotland to undertake the new, shortened midwifery programme. Students will qualify in only 20 months, and they will continue to work in their home regions, which include northern Scotland’s health boards.

I have outlined that we are exploring every possible avenue to improve health and social care by investing in those people who mean so much to us: the staff who care for us. They are the people whom we have clapped for and applauded, and that is why we will invest in them—in their pay and terms and conditions. We will also do everything that we possibly can to work with our remote and rural health boards, including NHS Highland, to see how we can support them in recruiting and retaining staff for the future.

13:40 Meeting suspended.

14:30 On resuming—

Business Motion

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-04895, in the name George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on committee meeting times.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees that, under Rule 12.3.3B of Standing Orders, the COVID-19 Recovery Committee, can meet, if necessary, at the same time as a meeting of the Parliament between 5.00 pm and 6.00 pm on Thursday 9 June 2022.

Motion agreed to.

Portfolio Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is rural affairs and islands. If any 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.

Agriculture (New Technologies)

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how it is supporting farmers to adapt to new technologies. (S6O-01198)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government is clear that adoption and development of technology and innovation will be a vital component of our vision for Scottish agriculture. Central to developing solutions to the challenges facing Scottish agriculture is the Scottish Government’s multimillion-pound portfolio of research on the environment, natural resources and agriculture, which launched recently. In addition, measures such as our knowledge transfer and innovation fund play a critical role in supporting new and innovative approaches in agricultural practice and I am pleased to confirm that the latest batch of scheme awards will be announced shortly.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

The James Hutton Institute, along with a number of Scottish scientists and NFU Scotland, supports the United Kingdom Government’s Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill, which will reach its second reading next week. The legislation will allow researchers and farmers to take advantage of crops that are more efficient and more climate friendly. However, the Scottish National Party and Green Government still insists on following outdated European Union regulations that ignore the evidence and, in so doing, dismisses Scottish scientists who stress the benefits and safety of gene editing. Why does the Government continue to ignore Scottish scientists and farmers? Why will the minister not commit to implementing the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill in Scotland?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

We are aware of the debate around new genomic techniques and how they relate to existing genetic modification legislation. In particular, we note the on-going consideration of that within the EU, our biggest international trading partner. The Scottish Government’s policy is to stay aligned, where practicable, with the EU, and we are closely monitoring the EU’s position on the issue.

In response to the UK Government’s invitation to join its Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill, Scotland’s position has not changed.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

George Eustice has written to the First Minister about the Scottish Government’s position on the new technologies, and the Scottish Government is considering its position. However, does the minister agree that the UK Government ought to respect the bounds of devolution and recognise that this matter and how to support Scotland’s farmers are matters for the Scottish Government?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Absolutely. Decisions on the Scottish environment and Scottish agriculture are matters for the Scottish Government. We want to ensure that Scotland operates at the highest environmental standards, and that we protect the strength of Scottish agriculture and food production. That will ensure that Scotland is able to protect and advance the high standards that we enjoyed as part of the EU, promote market access for our people and businesses, and ease the process of Scotland rejoining the EU in the future.

Rural Payments Schemes (Uptake)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government how it is ensuring uptake by farmers of rural payments schemes, including in relation to agroforestry. (S6O-01199)

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

The agriculture and rural economy directorate and Scottish Forestry operate a number of schemes that are accessible to farmers and crofters across Scotland. The Scottish Government communicates with potential applicants through emails and written correspondence where appropriate, as well as wider communications through social media and the press. In addition, we offer support for potential applicants through the Scottish Government’s network of local offices of the rural payments and inspections division and Scottish Forestry. We also seek partnership working through industry representative bodies such as NFU Scotland, the Scottish Crofting Federation and the Confederation of Forest Industries, to ensure that farmers, crofters and forestry industry representatives are aware of and can access the opportunity to apply for public funding and support where appropriate.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The issue is an important one, because the Soil Association Scotland has said that farmers and crofters can play a key role in helping to meet tree planting targets, and that agroforestry—which involves integrating trees with farming systems—could deliver 342,000 hectares of new woodland and trees outwith woodland by 2050.

Therefore, will the Scottish Government commit to making changes to the current forestry grant scheme to better meet the needs of farmers and crofters who want to plant more trees on their farms, and to open up new market opportunities for our timber, fruit and nuts?

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

The member raises an important issue, which will be one of the matters that we will consider when we have our consultation on the future agriculture bill. I am in regular contact with the Soil Association and am aware of its concerns, and I recently met the Woodland Trust to hear about some of the issues that the member raised.

Of course, we want to make it as easy as possible for people who want to integrate woodland and agroforestry to do so, because we know how many benefits come with that. We want to enable people to undertake such projects, where that is possible, and to make that process as easy as possible. Therefore, I will give the member’s suggestion serious consideration.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

Given how effectively agroforestry delivers environmental benefits without distorting the vital role that agriculture plays in our food and rural economies, can the cabinet secretary tell us when we can expect the new agricultural support schemes for agroforestry to come into effect and what she estimates the value of those schemes will be? The Soil Association estimates that the support that will be needed to meet the ambition for 342,000 hectares of new woodland to be planted by 2050 could be delivered at a cost of around £100 million.

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

In relation to future support schemes, the member will, of course, be aware that we have committed to our stability and simplicity policy until 2025. As I have said, when we consult on the agriculture bill that we will introduce next year, we will take all such proposals into consideration.

I echo what Colin Smyth said about the importance of agroforestry and all the benefits that come with it. As I said in my response to Liam Kerr, we want to make the process as easy as possible for people to access.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Scotland’s ambitious woodland creation targets and the Scottish Government’s commitment to supporting active farming and food production mean that it is likely to become necessary to identify opportunities for integrating farming with forestry. How many specific agroforestry applications have been issued by Scottish Forestry for on-farm tree planting?

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

Last year alone, Scottish Forestry approved 281 woodland creation schemes. Using its management information, it is possible to determine that 206 of those were for areas of 50 hectares or less, which means that those areas can be categorised as areas of on-farm tree planting.

Since 2015, 912 applications for tree planting on areas of 20 hectares or less have been made by farmers and small landholders.

Second Home Ownership (Rural and Island Communities)

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government, in relation to its cross-Government co-ordination on islands policies, what discussions the rural affairs secretary has had with the social justice secretary regarding the impact on rural and island communities of second home ownership. (S6O-01200)

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

The Scottish ministers continue to work closely to ensure that we take an effective cross-portfolio approach that includes the development of a remote, rural and islands housing action plan. We recognise that concentrations of second homes can affect community sustainability, wherever it occurs, and we have taken action. That includes the introduction of an additional dwelling supplement and a licensing scheme for short-term lets to regulate second homes that are used for secondary letting. We have also ensured that local authorities have powers to vary the council tax discount on second homes. The distinct housing needs of island communities are also reflected in “Housing to 2040” and the national islands plan.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

In March, when I asked the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government whether she had considered a council tax surcharge on second homes, she said—as the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands has suggested—that the additional dwelling supplement was sufficient to tackle the issue.

Have both cabinet secretaries discussed the issue? In Argyll and Bute, 6 per cent of homes are second homes; in Highland, the figure is 3 per cent; and, in the Western Isles, it is 5.7 per cent. Those areas have rates of fuel poverty of around 50 per cent. By the coming winter, second home owners in those areas will have shared in a £4 million windfall from the Scottish and UK Governments related to their council tax and energy rebates, while permanent residents in those areas are really struggling.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Could you come to a question, please?

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary commit to engaging in cross-Government working to claw back that windfall and make sure that it is distributed to people in permanent homes who need it most?

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

I am happy to commit to working across Government to do what we can for people who live in our most remote and rural areas and our island communities. The member raises an important matter, which is one of the key areas that I hear about when I am out and about and visiting island communities.

The work that we do on the development of the remote, rural and islands housing action plan will be critical to that. We must ensure that we get that engagement right by listening to communities and to island authorities as well as working across Government to ensure that we put the right solutions in place to tackle those problems.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The Government has pledged further action, with additional powers for local authorities, in its “Housing to 2040” plan, but there is very little detail about exactly how that will be done. Rural communities such as mine in the east neuk of Fife are afflicted by too many second homes, depriving working people of local homes that they can afford. When will the Government set out in more detail how we can control the numbers of second homes?

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

We will be engaging with stakeholders on how best to support and empower local authorities to allow them to manage the issues relating to second home ownership in their areas. That will also help to improve communities’ say in the way in which homes in their areas are used and make it easier for people to stay in their local area.

It was in order to limit the number of new-build homes becoming second homes that we increased the land and buildings transaction tax additional dwelling supplement in January 2019 from 3 to 4 per cent of the total purchase price for any additional home costing more than £40,000. I would be happy to liaise with my cabinet colleague and to come back to the member with more information about what the timescales might look like.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Scotland’s islands are vital contributors to our environment, society, economy, culture and heritage. Second homes clearly have a large impact on the social and economic make-up of island communities. What action is the Scottish Government taking in relation to the number of second homes that are used as short-term lets in rural and island areas?

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

Action taken to regulate short-term lets with licensing schemes and the option for local authorities to introduce control areas to manage the numbers and locations of such lets will be operational from 1 October this year.

I know that Highland Council has recently consulted on designating Badenoch in Strathspey as a control area.

We consider that the legislation that we have is appropriate for the whole of Scotland, including for island and rural communities, because it offers local authorities considerable flexibility as to how that is implemented.

Food Shortages and Food Prices

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

4. To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the impact of food shortages and rising food prices in Scotland. (S6O-01201)

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

The Scottish Government continues to hold numerous discussions with United Kingdom Government departments on a variety of topics relating to food resilience. This week, I met the Secretary of State for Food and Rural Affairs to discuss the on-going impacts on the food and drink sector.

The UK is facing a serious cost of living crisis, and the latest figures show that inflation has reached a 40-year high of 9 per cent. The UK 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.

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

We have heard stark warnings about food price inflation from the Bank of England, the chairman of Marks and Spencer and, recently, from the chief executive of the British Retail Consortium. Does the cabinet secretary agree with the comments of the former chief executive of Sainsbury’s, Justin King, who has said of the current pressure that

“Well in excess of 40 per cent of our food comes from Europe, so it started with Brexit.”

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

I agree with that. I think that many businesses, too, would agree with the member’s comment.

The Scottish food and drink industry currently faces numerous challenging impacts, but the UK Government’s reckless Brexit deal, which removed Scotland from the EU single market, played a huge part in that, alongside the significant loss that we have experienced from the ending of freedom of movement. The food and drink sector has really borne the brunt of the hard Brexit that has been pursued by the UK Government, particularly through the loss of freedom of movement and free trade. We repeatedly warned the UK Government that Brexit would be damaging to business as well as to trade, and we are now seeing that through decreases in our trade with the EU, as well as through a huge increase in food prices in the UK.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We have a supplementary question from Edward Mountain, who joins us remotely.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. One way to prevent food shortages is to empower farmers to plan for the future—something that they cannot do at the moment as they wait until 2024 for the Government’s future policy. The failure to speed things up is not good for our farmers and food producers, who have worked tirelessly, especially during the pandemic. Is the cabinet secretary prepared to meet Opposition parties as soon as possible to explain how the policy’s development is progressing and to discuss whether the date for putting it into action can be brought forward?

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

I have already outlined in previous responses today the timescales that we are looking at for introducing future legislation, as well as the consultation that will take place in relation to that.

On the process that we are following at the moment, it is important to note that we are discussing our future policy, of which co-development is a critical part. The agriculture reform implementation oversight board is essential, because it is vital that, when we develop our future mechanisms for support, we do that with the people they are going to affect the most. It is critical that we go through that co-development process as we design our future policy.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

Food prices are rising, but the costs that farmers pay for feedstuffs and fertiliser are rising more quickly. What help can both of our Governments give farmers to ensure food security? Will the Scottish Government now implement a human right to food in order to ensure that people do not go hungry?

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

The member will, no doubt, be aware that we have had discussions on the

Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill and that the final stage of that bill is due to take place shortly. It will provide the legal framework, but we have a number of policy initiatives that are about putting in place and delivering on that right to food, which will be incorporated into Scots law in future legislation.

We are committed to doing all that we can to help our farmers and crofters in Scotland where it is within our powers to do so. No doubt, the member will be aware of the specific issues that we have faced in the pig sector, in particular. We have extended our hardship scheme there, recognising the significant challenges that people in that sector—in fact, all farmers—face with all their input costs increasing significantly.

We continue to liaise with the UK Government to see what it can do to tackle some of the bigger issues to do with fuel, energy and other costs that are, unfortunately, not within the Scottish Government’s power to tackle. I find it particularly frustrating that we see initiatives taking place in other countries and other methods being put in place to help farmers that we, unfortunately, do not see replicated here. However, we will continue to keep the pressure on and will do what we can to help Scotland’s farmers and crofters.

Neospora

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to help farmers to tackle the reported increasing problem of Neospora in livestock. (S6O-01202)

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

The

Scottish Government does not require farmers to take specific action on Neospora, as it is a non-statutory disease. However, farmers have access, via Scotland’s Rural College veterinary services, to subsidised surveillance to assist with the costs of diagnosing animal health and welfare problems.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

This month, I will meet a local constituent at his farm to discuss four calves that were aborted during pregnancy due to

Neospora. Dogs are a primary host for the parasite, and it can take just one cow grazing on pasture that is contaminated by infected dog faeces for the entire herd to be infected. Can the minister tell me what is being done to educate members of the public that, when walking their dogs, they must pick up their dog mess, bag it and bin it to ensure that farmers’ livestock remains healthy?

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

Control of

Neospora is particularly difficult because, currently, no drugs are available to control the disease in cattle or to cure animals that are infected with it. However, certain management practices can be applied to try to reduce the risks. The Scottish Government has supported SRUC to make that information available to farmers as well as to vets. However, enforcement is difficult. The Dog Fouling (Scotland) Act 2003, which makes it an offence not to pick up dog faeces, unfortunately does not apply to agricultural land, including grazing land. It is therefore vital that dog owners are reminded about the importance of lifting dog faeces. The Scottish Government has worked with NFU Scotland to publicise the importance of people picking up after their dogs on farmland as well as in urban areas, and we continue to promote that message wherever we can.

Food and Drink Sector (Impact of Brexit)

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

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its latest assessment is of the impact of Brexit on Scotland’s food and drink sector. (S6O-01203)

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

The Scottish Government repeatedly warned that Brexit would be damaging. Recent trade statistics serve only to underline the negative impact of our exit from the European Union. In 2019, Scottish exports were growing consistently. We now know that Scotland’s trade with the EU was 16 per cent lower in 2021, with food exports to the EU down by £68 million and imports plummeting downwards by £220 million.

The Scottish Government continues to use all available devolved powers to support the sector. However, more needs to be done by the United Kingdom Government—now—to protect our food and drink sector.

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

In the past week, local media coverage has highlighted how north-east food and drink small businesses are struggling due to Brexit, the Ukraine conflict, VAT and soaring energy costs—all of which the cabinet secretary has highlighted. Some businesses have had to make difficult decisions, such as reducing their operating hours, increasing menu prices or even removing items entirely.

Will the minister give assurances that the Scottish Government will do everything that it can to press the UK Government to do more on issues such as VAT and energy costs, given that most of the problems are the result of the UK Government’s own mess?

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

I am happy to give that assurance. We will continue to do everything in our power to help our food and drink sector and to press the UK Government, because the issues are urgent and more needs to be done to address them. We will keep on pressing until they are taken seriously.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Finlay Carson has a supplementary question.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

The Scottish Government has long been opposed to the cultivation of genetically modified organisms, but, clearly, it misunderstands the significant difference between genetic modification and gene editing, which it needs to recognise. We know that, rather than basing decisions on science, the Green-Scottish National Party Government simply—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Carson, I take it that we are coming to the substance of the question that is in the

Business Bulletin

?

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Yes, absolutely, Presiding Officer.

The Scottish Government’s position is simply to stay aligned with the European Union, putting its constitutional obsession ahead of Scotland’s food security and turning its back on world-leading crop institutions such as the James Hutton Institute and the Roslin Institute—even after the European Commission launched a review on its own rules, concluding—[

Interruption

.] Presiding Officer, I am sorry—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I think that we can all calm down. Can we get to the supplementary question, please?

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Its decision comes after the European Commission launched a review into its own rules—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Could we get to a question, please, Mr Carson? It has been quite a long supplementary.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

It is likely that the EU will change its position on gene editing. NFU Scotland and scientists back gene editing, so why does the Government not do so?

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

It is a bit rich for the Tories to talk to us about not taking food security and food production seriously.

Where is the UK Government-established task force to look at food security like the task force that we set up in Scotland to tackle the very serious and urgent issues that our food and drink sector and primary producers face? Where is the focus on food production in the English government’s future policy on agriculture? They are completely absent, which is unlike our situation. We have put and kept the focus on food production because we recognise the importance of our food security in Scotland. We take such matters seriously, which is why we have undertaken the work that we have done in establishing a task force, to do everything within our power to help our producers in Scotland.

Allotments and Community Growing Projects

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

7. To ask the Scottish Government, in relation to the impact on the food and drink supply chain, what discussions the rural affairs secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the availability of allotments and community growing projects. (S6O-01204)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government fully supports increasing the land that is available for community growing, but, given that that is aimed at growing food for personal consumption, not on a commercial basis, it has not been considered in relation to the food and drink supply chain. Although allotments and their provision are the responsibility of local authorities, since 2012 the Scottish Government has allocated more than £1.6 million to directly supporting and increasing the land that is available for community growing.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee is currently undertaking an inquiry into the issue. It is clear from some of the work that we have looked at already that the local food strategies have not had the desired impact to empower communities to develop new allotments and community growing projects to levels that will help to meet demand. What steps do ministers now intend to take to help to turn that around and address the blockages in the system that prevent people from growing food locally?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

As Miles Briggs knows, the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee is undertaking an inquiry into whether the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 has improved the availability of allotments and reduced the barriers to accessing them. The committee held the first of three evidence sessions last week, and it has heard from a range of organisations that represent allotments and food growing associations.

A local food strategy consultation is under way.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

The Inverness-based community organisation Knocknagael Ltd is awaiting the outcome of its asset transfer request to convert the Scottish Government-owned Smiddy field into a green hub with allotments, an orchard, community agriculture and space for walking and wildlife. However, the local development plan proposes a change of land use, which could allow the site to be sold for volume house building. How will the Scottish Government ensure that communities are supported to develop projects that protect agricultural soil and biodiversity, such as the Knocknagael green hub?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

As is noted in the question, the land is subject to an asset transfer request. It would be inappropriate to comment on the detail of any of that while the Scottish Government is still considering the request and assessing it against the needs of the farm at Knocknagael and the operation of the crofting cattle improvement scheme. The Scottish Government has already had discussions with the Knocknagael Ltd community group with regard to the asset transfer request and proposed land use change. That engagement will continue through the conclusion of the asset transfer request process.

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

Allotments and community growing are undoubtedly important to encourage people to get engaged with the food that they eat. Does the minister agree that, if the Tories are really so concerned about the situations that are impacting the food and drink supply chain, they might want to raise those concerns with their colleagues in Westminster?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Government takes seriously Scotland’s food security, and it will continue to use all the devolved powers that are available to support the food and drink sector. However, the United Kingdom Government holds most of the levers to tackle the crisis. We will continue to press the UK Government and urge it to do more. More needs to be done now to address those issues and to protect our food and drink sector.

Clyde Islands

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what its priorities are for the Clyde islands. (S6O-01205)

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

The national islands plan provides a framework for action in order to meaningfully improve outcomes for Scotland’s island communities. The plan sets out 13 strategic objectives that are critical to improving the quality of life for all Scotland’s island communities across all six local authority areas. The Scottish ministers are committed to delivering those improved outcomes through the national islands plan and through other initiatives, such as our programme for government commitment to support six islands on their journeys towards carbon neutrality.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I am delighted that one of those islands is Cumbrae.

Although Clyde islands such as Arran and Cumbrae are not far from the mainland, assistance is required to sustain their working-age populations. Can the cabinet secretary advise on the Scottish Government’s support for the provision of affordable housing and other on-going efforts to attract more people of working age to live and work on Arran and Cumbrae?

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

I absolutely recognise how critical those issues are for our island communities. We have committed to delivering 110,000 affordable homes by 2032, at least 70 per cent of which will be available for social rent. Ten per cent of them will be in our remote, rural and island communities. We are also developing a remote, rural and islands housing action plan to help to attract and retain people in those communities.

We know that housing is not the only challenge and that we have to work closely with regional, local and community partners to address some of the wider challenges that our island communities face. This year, we will progress our commitment to develop an action plan to address population decline.

Census

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item

of business is a statement by Angus Robertson on Scotland’s census. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

On 28 April, I announced to Parliament that the census collection period would be extended until the end of May to give additional time for people who needed it to complete their returns and fulfil their personal legal responsibilities.

We have now reached the end of Scotland’s census 2022 collection period. I am pleased to announce that almost 2.3 million households provided a response, which means that we have achieved a national response rate of 87.9 per cent. Progress has also been made across the country, with 10 local authorities achieving return rates of more than 90 per cent, 28 authorities exceeding the 85 per cent mark and all achieving above 80 per cent.

Scotland’s census 2022 was designed to be a digital-first census, in recognition that that is the most convenient, most accessible and simplest channel for the majority of people. However, even with that innovation, it was never an online-only census; paper options were available throughout to all who preferred them. That is reflected in the split of returns received, which was 89 per cent digital to 11 per cent paper.

I extend my thanks to all households who have played their part and provided a response. Their participation in this once-in-a-decade exercise is hugely important. Their responses will enable better decisions to be made about things that matter, and will help local authorities, businesses and the Government to plan a wide range of vital public services to improve the lives of people living and working in Scotland.

The purpose of the extension period was to drive up national response rates further but also to ensure high levels of returns from each local authority, and to even out variability of returns as much as possible. In context, that means that, since 1 May, which was the original date for closing the census, the national response rate has increased by 8.7 percentage points, from 79.2 per cent, with more than 200,000 additional households being enumerated during May.

The second published target was to achieve a response rate of 85 per cent or more for each local authority area. Significant progress has been achieved in that respect since the beginning of the extension period. On 1 May it had been achieved by only one local authority; it has now been achieved by 28.

I announced to Parliament that up to £9.76 million more investment might be required to deliver the extension to the census collection period during May. That additional funding will be considered during the budget revision process and will be based on the actual additional costs that have been incurred. It is currently forecast to be around £6 million, which equates to 4.3 per cent of the lifetime costs of census 2022.

During the extended collection phase, National Records of Scotland and the Scottish Government implemented a wide range of interventions to increase return rates further. A significant multichannel awareness campaign was continued, including social media, radio and television advertisements reminding people of the importance of completing their census and their legal responsibility. Key milestones were announced periodically by social and print media to increase awareness.

Continued help and support to complete the census were available via the census website and a free helpline. During the census collection extension period, more than 30,700 calls were handled by staff at the contact centre, with more than 214 language interpretations having been offered and 5,314 telephone data captures undertaken.

In addition to the more than 8.8 million letters and postcards that were issued to households, 556,828 paper questionnaires were issued. Census field staff also undertook more than 1.68 million household visits across Scotland, providing in-person support, including doorstep capture, to those who needed it. Seventy-eight per cent of non-responding households received at least one visit. That was a huge feat that was realised only through the hard work and dedication of enthusiastic individuals, which I was able to witness first hand during my own field visit in Easterhouse.

During the extension period, a number of field events took place to encourage census completion where possible, or to generate call-backs from the contact centre until the end of live collection. Those events focused on parts of the country in which there were lower response rates, and on engaging with young people and students, as well as with minority ethnic communities. Locations included faith centres, supermarkets and universities, with field staff being available to assist with census completion at each site.

I would like personally to thank the hundreds of field staff, contact centre agents and census officials who have worked tirelessly over the past few months, providing invaluable support to the people of Scotland to help to ensure that their voices were heard.

Householders also received a range of additional information through the post, including a third reminder letter, a postcard and a further reminder letter for those who had started, but not finished, their census online.

National Records of Scotland also continued to work closely with a wide range of public, private and third sector organisations and faith leaders and representatives. I would like once again to thank those organisations sincerely for their hard work and support in continually promoting the census.

Finally, I would like to thank members again for their support in promoting the census, both at the national level and locally with their constituents. I know that many of them recently took time out of their busy schedules to visit census staff during field visits.

It is clear that there was a need for the extension; unfortunately, there remains a portion of Scotland’s households that have not completed the census. That is despite a large-scale public awareness campaign, millions of letters and more than 1.68 million field visits. It is important that we understand why that happened so that lessons can be learned for the future of the census.

To that end, in the last week of the census collection period, a data collection exercise was undertaken by field staff to understand the reasons for non-completion by householders. Although many reasons were offered by householders, by far the most common, at 35 per cent, was that they were “too busy.” That suggests that changes in society’s attitudes to the census and completing it have had a significant part to play. Once it has been evaluated, this exercise, combined with market research and global experiences, will provide valuable insight into the reasons for non-completion across Scotland.

However, the professional body that is responsible for running the census—NRS—regards the extension to the collection period as a success. It has enabled more than 200,000 additional households to complete their census and has enabled the majority of local authorities to achieve return rates that are greater than 85 per cent, with no authority’s rate being below 80 per cent.

The improved national return rate and the important coverage across the country provide NRS with the confidence to conclude that it is in a good position to move on to the next element of the census—namely, the vitally important census coverage survey—then to the statistical estimation and processing work that is required to deliver high-quality census outputs.

Based on the significant improvement that has been achieved, NRS is satisfied that it was appropriate to conclude the public awareness campaign and field force enumeration on 31 May, as announced. As happened in the censuses that were carried out in the rest of the United Kingdom and in previous censuses, over the coming weeks, NRS will accept late postal and digital returns that have been delayed for legitimate reasons.

Filling in the census is a personal legal responsibility, and allowing people who have previously refused to respond a window in which to do so is standard procedure. In line with previous censuses, anyone who has directly refused to fill in the census has now been written to and given a final opportunity to do so before NRS begins the process of referring them for potential prosecution. However, decisions regarding prosecutions remain a matter for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.

Scotland’s census, in common with other modern censuses, combines a number of elements. Following the collection phase, NRS is now focused on planned post-collection quality control and assurance work, which includes the census coverage survey, which is the second-largest social research exercise in Scotland after the census itself.

The census coverage survey launches on 13 June; the survey was also done in 2001 and 2011 in Scotland. It is a separate survey from the census, and although it covers a much smaller number of Scottish households—about 1.5 per cent, or 53,000 households—it is still the second-largest social research exercise in Scotland after the census itself. It is conducted door-to-door by staff who carry identification, and it ensures that a comprehensive and accurate picture of return rates across the country has been recorded. The census coverage survey provides important information that, along with other administrative data, enables statisticians to estimate the nature and volume of missing census returns, and to deliver the statistical database that is used to deliver outputs.

Over the coming months, statisticians within NRS will also make use of administrative data sources to improve the quality of the estimation work, thereby delivering high-quality population and characteristics data.

An international steering group of global census experts has also been established by the registrar general to help to steer the work of NRS as we move forward from the collection element of the census. The steering group, which is chaired by Professor James Brown, has acknowledged that we are in a strong position from which to move forward. I welcome the contributions that that group will make to steering NRS’s statistical and methodological work over the next few months. That will support NRS to deliver both the census coverage survey and its work to identify the appropriate administrative data that can support quality assurance work.

I am aware that, in recent weeks, much has been made of the response rate, particularly in the light of pre-census targets. I take this opportunity to reassure the people of Scotland that a return rate of 87.9 per cent is a good level of national census returns and puts us in a strong position on which to build.

In conclusion, through a combination of census returns, individual administrative data, the census coverage survey and adjustments using aggregate administrative data, NRS will be able to proceed effectively with the next phase of the census, which is to produce the high-quality outputs that are required by data users.

Finally, I say that one of the aims of Scotland’s census 2022 programme is to make recommendations for future censuses. There have been many important lessons learned over the past few months, and there is much work to do to understand what has worked well and what could have been better. I am clear that the evaluation of Scotland’s Census 2022 will reflect on that in order to make informed recommendations for the future.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that were raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. It would be helpful if members who wish to ask a question could press their request-to-speak buttons now.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the cabinet secretary for prior sight of his statement. However, nowhere in his statement was there mention of the key target figure—the minimum 94 per cent response rate, which was set by NRS. No wonder, because the actual national results are way off that rate.

I will lay out some other facts. The Scottish return rate is almost 10 per cent behind the rate in the rest of the UK. Glasgow, our most densely populated city, is a write-off at 81 per cent, which is not even near what is required, and we have had delay after delay, and an ever-increasing bill for taxpayers.

A few weeks ago, we were told that Scotland’s census had “a solid foundation”—but Scotland’s census lies in ruins. It is a disgrace. The Scottish National Party could have run the census in sync with the rest of the UK last year but, as always, it had to be different. The cost of that decision is now clear for all to see.

Does the cabinet secretary accept that it is highly probable that the census could now be worthless? Does he agree with Mark Roodhouse, who is a fellow of the Economic History Society, who has said that it is likely that there will have to be an interim census or similar statistical exercise between now and 2031 in order to deal with what has happened?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I will begin by saying—because it is important to state it on the record—that it is not the Government that completes individual census returns: doing that is a matter of personal responsibility. I find it passing strange that the party that believes in personal responsibility has drawn absolutely no attention to the fact that it was the decision of people, for a variety of different reasons, not to return their census responses. That is key to understanding the issues that we have faced with the census.

Although 2.3 million households did complete the census, sadly, 316,000 households did not. That is despite 8.8 million letters and reminders—and I am not even counting the public relations campaigns that built on that. I will update Parliament, because I think that the figures are quite enlightening, in order that members better understand the challenge among the parts of the community that did not take part in the census.

Towards the end of May, the census field force asked just over 1,200 people, who had not returned a census form, what their main reasons were for not completing it. There was a wide range of reasons. The headline responses were as follows: 35 per cent of those who were asked stated that their being too busy was the reason, or one of the reasons; 17 per cent stated that they were not aware of the census; and 14 per cent stated that they did not realise that they had to complete it. Concerns about privacy, trust in Government, the nature of the questions and access to a paper copy all came out at 5 per cent or less.

Yes, there are lessons to be learned, but I totally and utterly repudiate Donald Cameron’s assertions about writing off anything in the census. They are false, ill informed, misleading and, frankly, beneath him, because he should know that census experts say that it has “a solid foundation” on which to build.

Sadly, only one Conservative Party MSP could be bothered to turn out for an NRS visit to see how the census was actually being conducted, but I hope that, in time, they will learn from what happened during the census. We all have lessons to learn, but the slightly pathetic party politics that we have heard from the front bench of the Conservative Party add little to the understanding of what has worked well in the census and what needs to be learned from it.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance notice of his statement.

In 2020, the then Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Fair Work and Culture said that

“the decision to move Scotland’s Census to 2022”

was

“the only option in which there is confidence of producing high quality outputs”

to

deliver the benefits required by the people of Scotland.” —[

Written Answers,

13 August 2020; S5W-31002

.

]

NRS were clear at the time that a response rate of at least 90 per cent was critical to achieving the delivery of high-quality census returns. The cabinet secretary now says not to worry, because the delayed and underperforming census will be sorted through sampling 53,000 members of the public. That is a subset, so how will it reflect the different challenges in different local communities? Will it not be less reliable and less accurate? How will the diversity of Scotland’s population be represented?

I agree with the cabinet secretary that we need to understand what went wrong, but how can we have any confidence in this Government’s promise to learn lessons from this census? There were challenges in and lessons from the 2011 census that needed to be addressed, such as around programme management, data collection, field operation, output content production and dissemination. What went wrong this time? With hard-working staff, I visited residents of a tower block where, just two weeks ago, there was a 57 per cent return rate. How will their needs be met? How many people on low incomes across Scotland, who thought that they had returned the census through digital means, should now be worried about being fined £1,000? Given the cost of living crisis, we need to know the answers to those questions.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I thank Sarah Boyack for her questions on the statement and the many positive points that she made. I also thank her personally for being the only Labour member who went out with the NRS to see how the census was being conducted.

In terms of having confidence, if she is not prepared to listen to what the NRS has to say about things, I point her in the direction of the international steering group, which is made up of experts on the census. For those who are unaware of who is on the group, I can say that it is chaired by Professor James Brown, the Australian Bureau of Statistics professor of official statistics at the University of Technology Sydney. He is joined by Professor Sir Ian Diamond, the UK’s national statistician, and Professor David Martin, professor of geography at the University of Southampton and deputy director of the UK Data Service. I could go on, because it includes other colleagues who are eminent in their field of conducting censuses.

I am confident that the exercise that is starting on the 13th of this month will add tremendous value to the work that took place in the census collection period. I know that Sarah Boyack—and others in the chamber who are members of the committee that oversees my portfolio area—will be speaking to the NRS and I am sure that they will be speaking to some of those experts. I hope that Sarah Boyack gets the reassurance that I believe that I have had from the NRS and other experts. Yes, there are lessons that need to be learned, and, yes, we need to make sure that all of Scotland’s communities are reflected in the census data at the end of the process.

That is absolutely mission critical. Yes, we did not reach the 94 per cent target that the NRS wished us to reach—we have got to within 6 points of that target—but that does not call into question the returns of the census. To those who wish to amplify the messages from certain corners of the media—which, sadly, do not understand how censuses are conducted in the 21st century—I say that there are lessons to be learned, but that overexaggeration will not help us to reach the conclusions that we need to reach at the end of every census.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Before I call the next member, I ask for greater brevity in the questions and the answers. I have allowed some latitude for the front-bench speakers, but if we continue in that way, we will not get in everybody who would like to ask a question.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

In his statement, the cabinet secretary outlined that the census is not complete, and that a lot of administrative and validation work still needs to be done. Can the cabinet secretary give us an indication of the timescale in which the NRS will be able to answer some of the questions around this year’s census, with a view to informing the learning points that have been identified?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The NRS plans to start publishing results from the census approximately a year after collection, in 2023. Results will be laid before Parliament and made available in a clear and usable form for all users.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Age Scotland chief executive Brian Sloan said that

the Scottish Government should “shine a light” on elderly people who risk missing the census deadline. Within three days, elderly pensioners will face criminal records and hefty fines if they are unaware of the census or are unable to complete the form.

What work is the Scottish Government doing specifically to identify older people who might miss the deadline, and will the 12 June date be the final one, even if it means handing out fines and criminal records to vulnerable pensioners?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I say very gently that the member clearly does not understand the process by which the NRS moves on to the next stage of working out who has not returned a census. Prosecution and the involvement of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service impact those who have expressly refused to take part in the census, not those who were unaware of it—there is an important distinction between the two, and it is important that everybody in the chamber understands that.

I can assure the member about the lengths that the NRS has gone to. We do not have time for me to go through the amount of correspondence that has been issued to people and that specifically targets certain parts of the community, including the aged, because the point that the member made is correct. It is mission critical to get the results from that part of the Scottish community. The NRS has been extremely focused on that, as have the enumerators, and I am clear that the returns that they have been getting will be adequately capturing that important part of Scottish society.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I met enumerators in my constituency and heard about some of the challenges that they face, not least with translation. One enumerator spent several hours with one household because of language issues. Will such experiences feed into the work done by the NRS and the international steering group in the future?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Absolutely. I think that I have updated members on how many translation services were offered in the extension period, in addition to the earlier period of the census, across a wide range of languages. If there is any evidence that there is still work to be done in communities for which English is a second language, we absolutely need to learn about that.

I look forward to the work that will be undertaken by the steering group, and if there is anything that can be done to ensure that people fully understand the process in future censuses, that is absolutely a lesson that needs to be learned.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

The cabinet secretary talked about the personal responsibility for completing the census, which is correct. However, the figures that he gave us were that 35 per cent of people were too busy to complete the census, 17 per cent said that they were not aware of it, and 14 per cent did not realise that there was a requirement to do it. Who is responsible for the 31 per cent who did not know about it or did not realise that they were responsible?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

That is one of the most searching questions that we have had this afternoon. It goes to the heart of trying to understand why there has been a group of particularly hard-to-reach households and individuals during the census.

I am asking myself that question. There were households that received a multitude of correspondence in a variety of formats, and houses that were visited not just once but in many cases twice, three times, four times or five times, and still a significant percentage of people were saying, “I didn’t know it was happening”.

To my mind, that is absolutely the lesson that needs to be learned, because my fear is that that phenomenon is not a one-off. I think that those of us who knock on doors, as we do at election time, will understand some of the phenomenon that I have been trying to describe, but it is something that the international steering group, the Scottish Parliament and the committee will want to look at very closely. If we can get an answer to that challenge, I think that we will be able to see the same kind of percentage returns as in previous censuses.

Having said that, I think that there is a particular challenge with a part of Scottish society. Incidentally, I do not think that this phenomenon is just in Scottish society but will be seen elsewhere. All of us will have to try to work out whether traditional means are meeting the needs of people who do not understand, realise or, perhaps, want to realise that they need to take part in the census.

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

In my drop-in surgeries in Tesco, I often find elderly people who do not use or have access to the internet or have a mobile phone. Many of them live alone, with perhaps no one to assist them in completing a paper form. What was identified as a factor in non-completion when those non-returning households were visited? What recommendations will fall from that?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

One thing that happened during the extended period of the census is that hundreds of thousands of paper copies of the census were sent to hard-to-reach households that had not returned a census online. That was in addition to the paper copies that were sent to those who had rung up and used the service to order them.

To answer Christine Grahame’s question, there were a variety of ways of trying to make sure that gaps could be plugged, if one wanted to assume that issues with digital access were prohibiting people from taking part. Measures were undertaken to try to make sure that people had alternatives. Those included providing paper copies, as well as enumerators turning up at people’s doors and offering to help fill out the forms on paper or online. Great efforts were undertaken, particularly in the extended period of the census, and especially in parts of certain local authority areas and parts of the country where there were much lower returns. Great efforts were made to try to make sure that people could take part in the way that was most appropriate for them.