Scottish Parliament, 16 June 2022

360 contributions from 71 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.

Real Living Wage

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what progress is being made in encouraging employers to pay the real living wage. (S6O-01239)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Good progress has been made in promoting payment of the real living wage in Scotland. Last month, the number of living wage accredited employers increased to just under 2,700. That is proportionately five times higher than the figure for the rest of the United Kingdom and it means that some 55,000 workers have more wages in their pockets due to employer accreditation.

Under our regionally focused making living wage places scheme, we saw Edinburgh city, for instance, announce its accreditation as a making a living wage place in November last year, during living wage week.

Our living hours accreditation scheme continues to grow, with four accredited employers having achieved living hours accreditation since its launch, late in 2021.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I welcome the continued efforts to promote a living wage. The minister will agree that an unambiguous commitment from employers to pay the living wage and recognise trade unions in the workplace is a strong platform for being a decent employer and providing a fair and productive work environment. Does the minister agree with me and the Scottish Trades Union Congress that the Scottish Parliament must have control over employment law in order to be able to fully embed decent employment rights by setting a real living wage and ending the exploitative use of zero-hours contracts?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Marie McNair is right. It is, of course, timely to raise that issue, given that we have just experienced a pandemic, with its implications for many employees in Scotland, and we are now facing a cost of living crisis. Now is the time to reflect on the powers that the Parliament has to support workers and ensure that they receive a decent wage for their work.

Eighty-five per cent of Scots receive a real living wage. However, if we had employment powers, we could do a lot more to ensure that 100 per cent of Scottish employees got a decent wage. The other issues that Marie McNair mentioned could also be addressed if the Parliament had the powers to do so.

Scottish National Investment Bank (Missions)

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the delivery of the missions of the Scottish National Investment Bank. (S6O-01240)

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

Over the past 18 months, the Scottish National Investment Bank has built an operational structure, recruited more than 60 staff, delivered investment commitments of over £200 million to 16 projects across all three of its missions, and leveraged in over £450 million of additional private funding.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

In the light of Professor Ross Brown’s warnings on 23 May that the Scottish National Investment Bank will continue to flounder and will ultimately fail if its missions remain so broad and incoherent, will the Scottish Government commit to providing the bank with a clear mission to drive high-value-added industrial growth in advanced manufacturing in Scottish-owned firms instead of investments in things such as a forestry fund that is aimed at high-net-worth clients who are seeking tax-efficient structures?

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

I will make two caveats. If I recall correctly, all members agreed that the Scottish National Investment Bank should retain operational independence and all parties agreed on the missions that were set for it. As a start-up, the bank has done an incredible job not just in building its operations but in ensuring that the pipeline of investments goes out the door.

In the past 18 months, the bank has made eight investments in the net zero mission, four investments in the place mission and four investments in the innovation and people mission. One question that I have for Mr Sweeney is: which mission does he think we should drop instead of adding more missions for it?

School Pupils (Free Laptops or Tablets)

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on progress towards its commitment to deliver a free laptop or tablet to every school child in Scotland. (S6O-01241)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We are committed to ensuring that every child has access to a device and connectivity by the end of this parliamentary session. We have already provided £25 million to councils, resulting in over 72,000 pupils receiving a device and 14,000 receiving an internet connection.

We know that a number of local authorities have also invested in technology. They have indicated that, in total, almost 280,000 devices have been, or are in the process of being, distributed to learners.

This is a complex and ambitious commitment, and we are currently looking at the available infrastructure in schools to support the wider roll-out of technology. We are working in partnership with local government colleagues and have convened a joint partnership board with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to oversee the work.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

During the period of Covid restrictions, we had pupils doing home learning who would have benefited from access to a free laptop or tablet. Many of them did not have that access.

The cabinet secretary is now saying that the programme will not be completed until the end of this session of Parliament. That means that there are pupils currently in secondary 2 or S3 who will be leaving school without benefiting from the programme. Is the cabinet secretary being serious in saying that we will have to wait another four years before that commitment is delivered?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Our manifesto made it very clear that the commitment was for the parliamentary session, and that is what we are committed to. I would contrast that with the recent Tory manifesto for the local government elections, which contains no timescales and no commitment for a device for every child. The Tories had an opportunity to lay out their alternative; they did not. In the meantime, we will get on with delivering on our manifesto commitment.

Police Scotland (Mental Health)

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to support the mental health and wellbeing of officers and staff within Police Scotland. (S6O-01242)

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

It is essential that mental health and wellbeing support is provided to police officers and staff at the point of need, and I welcome the initiatives that are being undertaken by Police Scotland—the employer—to support its workforce.

The Scottish Government has provided funding to the Lifelines Scotland wellbeing programme, which provides tailored online resources for blue-light responders, volunteers and their family members. That includes the provision of £97,864 in this financial year. We are considering a proposal from Lifelines for further funding support in 2022-23.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Official statistics indicate that officers and staff within the force have missed over 77,000 days during 2021-22, and the Scottish Police Federation has stressed that levels of officers and staff are reaching a critical stage and that officers are leaving in droves.

The Scottish National Party Government has handed Police Scotland a further real-terms budget cut of 8 per cent. What action is being taken to reverse that decline and to do all that we can to maintain, retain and support our police force?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

Had Alexander Stewart done his homework, he would have found out that the reason for the reduction in police force numbers is to do with the 26th UN climate change conference of the parties—COP26—and with Covid, both of which have limited the police’s ability to undertake training of new officers at Tulliallan, because it was being used for other purposes. The police will tell him that.

Alexander Stewart asked what else we are doing. We are going to pay our police officers more than the Tories pay the police officers whom they have control over; we are going to have more police officers per head of population than there are in England and Wales; and we are going to oppose the Tories’ imposition of a 5.2 per cent cut in our budget this year, which limits how much we can do.

We are doing the things that help police officers—unlike the Tories, who have undermined and underresourced the police in England and Wales.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Two years ago, one third of officers were saying that they were going to work mentally unwell. We have already heard that thousands of work days have been lost over the past two years because of mental health issues, yet ministers said that they were very satisfied with the mental health support that was being provided.

This week, when I spoke to Calum Steele from the SPF, he told me that the situation is still dire. When will ministers stop being satisfied and get on with improving the service?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I have mentioned the work that we have done through the initiatives that we have funded for the police for this year, which we are considering funding again for next year.

Willie Rennie will know that officers also have access to Police Scotland’s 24/7 employee assistance programme—the EAP—and the trauma risk management programme.

We are not saying that everything that can be done is being done—as Calum Steele would argue, we should continually look to improve the services that we provide, and we recognise the special pressures that Covid has presented for the police. The police have done a fantastic job throughout the Covid period, and we want to continue to support them. We are not saying that we have done all that can be done—that is the responsibility of the employer, Police Scotland, with a role for the SPA. However we will continue to help them wherever we can to protect the wellbeing of our officers.

Home Energy Scotland (Support Capacity)

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

5. I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of interests. I am an owner of a private rented property in North Lanarkshire.

To ask the Scottish Government what the support capacity of Home Energy Scotland was before that was increased by 12,000 households. (S6O-01243)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

In 2021-22, Home Energy Scotland had capacity to provide advice and support to more than 120,000 unique households, through more than 400,000 advice interactions. As a result of increased funding in 2022-23, Home Energy Scotland advisers have the capacity to provide support to 132,000 unique households through 440,000 advice interactions.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Although the cabinet secretary has mentioned that that figure has increased to 132,000 unique households, the capacity to reach low-income, potentially fuel-poor, clients has not increased proportionately with that increase of 12,000 households. Action will be critical this summer, with the price cap set to go up in the autumn. Has the Government written to every group that is eligible for the warmer homes Scotland grant since the cap went up in the spring, and how many installations does the Government expect to deliver from those 44,000 calls?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I think that the member’s question relates to the 440,000 calls or interactions. Obviously, that is a demand-led service that depends on the needs and the circumstances of individuals, and what the best route of support might be for them.

In relation to those who are most vulnerable, with Home Energy Scotland we have been able to augment access to the energycarers service, which specifically helps people who are most vulnerable and who may not be able to take advice and support by telephone or through online services. A care adviser will visit those people and provide advice and support to them in their homes. That service is particularly targeted at people who are extremely vulnerable, in order to meet the types of concerns that the member has.

However, if the member has a particular issue or an experience from a constituent where he believes that we could take further action, I would be more than happy to look at that in order to make sure that we are doing everything that we can to support households.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that older people will be the most vulnerable when it comes to facing spiralling energy bills, as they have fixed incomes and often live in older, energy-inefficient housing. According to Age Scotland, 55 per cent of over-55s whom they surveyed were unaware of the Scottish Government’s schemes to assist with energy efficiency.

What steps is the Scottish Government taking in order to ensure that the increased resource that has been made available to Home Energy Scotland includes more proactive targeting of houses where older people live?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I am always open to looking at what more we can do to help to promote Home Energy Scotland’s work. The principal way that much of its work is taken forward is through trusted partners such as health and social care organisations, food banks, charities and local authorities. They provide the vast majority of the referral pathways into Home Energy Scotland.

As I mentioned, we have augmented the support for Home Energy Scotland to provide energycarer services to people who are most vulnerable and may not be able to take advice online or over the phone. However, again, if the member has any specific examples of constituents who have not been able to access services, or believes that there is further action that we can take to promote those services, I am always open to looking at those matters.

Transport Links (Rural Areas)

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

6. To ask the Scottish Government how it is strengthening transport links to rural areas. (S6O-01244)

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

The Scottish Government’s ambitions for future transport infrastructure investment in rural areas are highlighted in the 45 recommendations in the second strategic transport projects review, or STPR2. The recommendations include continued investment in ferry replacements and port upgrades to improve their resilience and reliability. We also intend to consider two potential fixed links in the Western Isles, as well as a link between Mull and the mainland. STPR2 provides the necessary evidence base that is required to help secure the future funding of those projects, including those that have potential to transform the way we travel in rural areas.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

As a result of ScotRail’s emergency timetable, it is impossible for people from Caithness to get the train to attend hospital appointments in Inverness. The reimbursement mileage is woeful, at 15p a mile, and does not adequately cover their costs. How will the minister ensure that no patient is missing out on healthcare as a result of the lack of public transport in the area?

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

As the member will know, ScotRail’s emergency timetable has arisen as a result of drivers refusing to work on their rest days. I am very grateful that the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen has since recommended that the pay deal is accepted; it will now go to members for a referendum.

I have asked ScotRail to look at how we might be able to reinstate the normal timetable as quickly as possible, noting, of course, that ScotRail has already reintroduced a number of services.

On the specific point that Miss Grant raised about reimbursement, I would be happy to address that with ScotRail and, having noted some of her concerns in that area, to write to her with more detail.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Bus passengers across rural Stirling are experiencing last-minute cancellations, especially on services X10, 38 and 52. First Bus has advised that there is a shortage of bus drivers. Can the Scottish Government advise on what more can be done to address those shortages and other issues that are affecting the industry?

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

There is currently a shortage of heavy goods vehicle drivers for buses and lorries as a result of the pandemic creating a backlog in testing and training. That has been exacerbated by Brexit, which has prevented people from the European Union from coming to Scotland to work freely.

With regard to our representations, we have repeatedly sought a formal role in determining which occupations are on the shortage occupation list, but the UK has denied us that. Bus drivers are not included in the SOL. I understand that the UK Government will be reviewing the list later in the year, and we have asked for full involvement in that process.

The current position is clearly causing issues for local and national bus services across the country. We have provided up to £210 million of funding to support bus services during the pandemic and an additional £40 million to support recovery for this year. In addition, I have asked Transport Scotland for urgent advice on why it appears that so many services are now being cancelled as a result of shortages and on how the service changes are impacting on communities more broadly.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

First, I take the opportunity to congratulate the minister on her recent marriage. [

Applause

.]

The minister mentioned funding. The network support grant plus has been keeping bus operators afloat, in particular in rural areas, but it is due to end next month. Industry experts have said that that could lead to a cut of 20 per cent on some routes, as well as rising fares and depot closures.

Bus operators are calling for the fund to be extended at its current rate by three months, as that would allow passenger levels to recover. Will the minister agree to that?

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

I am aware of the issues that the member has raised, and I thank him for his good wishes.

Some of the funding that is associated with the support grants is related to the pandemic, and it was always due to come to an end at some point. However, I have asked officials in Transport Scotland to see what more we might be able to do to support rural bus services.

Bracken Control (Asulox)

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

7. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the continued use of Asulox for bracken control. (S6O-01245)

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

An emergency authorisation for the use of the herbicide product Asulox for bracken control has been submitted for 2022. The Health and Safety Executive is considering the application on behalf of all the United Kingdom Administrations, and that process is on-going.

I have spoken to stakeholders directly over the past week, and I understand the difficulties that are associated with bracken control and the key role that Asulox currently plays. As part of those discussions, I have indicated that it is important for Government to work with stakeholders to explore options for more sustainable forms of bracken control in the future.

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

I am happy to hear that the minister has met with stakeholders, and I am reassured that she is aware of just how damaging bracken is, not just to the environment but to animal health, and because of the potential for very serious accidents involving land managers when trying to manage bracken using land-based methods such as bracken busters on challenging hill land.

I have been asked by constituents to emphasise to the minister that, while the HSE continues its deliberations on whether to grant the extension, they will be looking to the Scottish Government to protect their interests, the environments that they manage and the health and wellbeing of them and their staff.

Will the minister meet me urgently to discuss what assurances she can give to my constituents, who are in the position of having a serious on-going bracken problem to deal with, but who have no safe method of doing so other than aerial-applied asulam?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I would be very happy to meet the member to discuss this important issue, and I understand the concerns that he and his constituents are raising. I reassure him that in considering the emergency application for the use of Asulox, I have sought out views from stakeholders, including those who currently use Asulox for bracken control. Last week, I met NFU Scotland, NatureScot, Scottish Forestry and the RSPB to hear their views, and they have all made their positions clear.

I will continue to work closely with stakeholders and the other UK Administrations to explore options for sustainable forms of bracken control.

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 Mr Max Hiegelsberger, President of the State Parliament of Upper Austria. [

Applause

.]

Scottish Independence Referendum

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. The Scottish National Party Government has said that it wants to hold another divisive independence referendum in October next year, but Nicola Sturgeon cannot even say whether ferries will float by then; she will not have closed the school attainment gap by then; she will not have returned national health service services to normal by then; and she will not have cleared the court backlogs by then.

Why should all those pressing issues play second fiddle to another divisive independence referendum next year?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, I welcome Douglas Ross’s line of questioning. It is at least an implicit—

if not yet an explicit—recognition that people in Scotland will have their say on independence in line with the democratic mandate that this Parliament has.

The second point is that the case for independence is not distinct or separate from the big challenges that Scotland, in common with countries across the world, is facing right now. Instead, independence is part of the solution to those challenges. It is about how we equip ourselves better as a country to meet those challenges and fulfil our potential.

Independence is not the distraction that Douglas Ross wants to pretend that it is. Instead, it presents an alternative to a failing United Kingdom system—a failing UK system that gives us a Prime Minister right now with no democratic or moral mandate in Scotland; that has given us a Brexit that we did not vote for; that is giving us the highest inflation in the G7 and the lowest projected growth in the G20, with the sole exception of Russia; that is constraining our public finances and tying the hands of the Scottish Government; and, of course, that give us the obscenity of a Government that tries to shore up its own base by deporting vulnerable people to Rwanda, which is utterly immoral.

Independence is an alternative to that. It would give this Parliament additional powers to navigate those challenges and meet the full massive potential of this country.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

What a depressing answer from the First Minister—

never once responding to the points about education, our NHS or the justice system—[

Interruption.

]

The Presiding Officer

We will hear Mr Ross, thank you.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

—never once responding to the pressing issues for people across Scotland right now, which will be playing second fiddle to an independence referendum, because we know that the First Minister cannot focus on improving our country when she is trying to divide it all over again.

We can see right now what happens when this SNP Government is distracted: the census was a shambles, because the constitution secretary—who is looking up to the sky, maybe for divine inspiration—was too busy updating the “UK bad” bar charts to actually count the number of people in Scotland. That is what happens when time and resources are not thrown squarely behind things that really should matter. Mistakes are made and the people of Scotland are the ones who suffer.

Let us look at Scotland’s NHS. Waiting lists are continually hitting record highs across our health service, from accident and emergency to cancer diagnosis. Patients are waiting years for essential treatment. Why does Scotland’s NHS not deserve the First Minister’s full focus right now?

The First Minister

Those issues have my full focus. However, since Douglas Ross has raised them, I will take them on point by point, and he should listen carefully.

First of all, though, he talks about bar charts. What every one of the bar charts in the publication that we produced on Tuesday this week shows is that when 10 comparator countries across Europe—with different characteristics but all independent—are compared with Scotland, they are wealthier, they are fairer and they have better wellbeing than Scotland as part of the UK. They make the case for Scotland becoming an independent country.

Let me set out the ways in which the Government is using our current powers, and in doing so making the case for more powers. Let us look at the economy. In the most recent quarter, Scotland’s gross domestic product grew; in the rest of the UK, GDP contracted. Unemployment right now is lower in Scotland than in the rest of the UK. Unlike the rest of the UK, Scotland has a positive trade balance in goods with the rest of the world. We have the position as the top-performing—[

Interruption

.]—

The Presiding Officer

We will hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

—economy in the UK for inward investment outside of London.

The Presiding Officer

Will hear the First Minister. Thank you.

The First Minister

Business research and development is up under this Government by 99.5 per cent, compared with under 30 per cent in the rest of the UK.

Let us turn to schools. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Scotland has the highest proportion of 25 to 65-year-olds in the UK with post-secondary education. Of all UK nations, we have the highest number of teachers. We have the highest number of schools per 100,000 pupils. On the last exam day, we saw higher passes at the highest level in the history of devolution. On access to university, the independent commissioner for fair access says that

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, First Minister.

The First Minister

We have higher staff numbers than in other parts of the UK, and we have the best-paid staff anywhere in the UK.

If that is what we can do with the powers of devolution, imagine how much better we can do with the powers of independence.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister’s answers are as selective as her bar charts. Yet again, there is nothing about the attainment gap. What happened to that being the First Minister’s number 1 priority?

There have now been two questions about the NHS and two answers that never mentioned our NHS, because those issues are put on the back burner.—[

Interruption

.]

Those issues are put on the back burner.

The Presiding Officer

Members!

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

For the SNP and the SNP Government, those issues are put on the back burner because they have set a date for an illegal referendum in just 16 months’ time. Nicola Sturgeon is distracted all over again, and we know what happens next.

Every time the SNP campaigns for another referendum, Scotland’s drug deaths spiral. The First Minister has admitted that herself.—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

She took her “eye off the ball”, and people lost their lives.

The latest figures show that Nicola Sturgeon’s drug deaths scandal remains the worst in Europe. We have brought forward a solution that we could implement straight away. Our right to recovery bill now has cross-party support. Nicola Sturgeon’s Government could throw its weight behind it and we could pass that bill now, this year.

Why should a referendum bill be passed before the First Minister sorts out Scotland’s drug deaths scandal?

The First Minister

On drug deaths, I have said—and people who have been listening to earlier First Minister’s question times will have heard me say—that we will look very sympathetically at Douglas Ross’s bill when he publishes it. We cannot do that until the bill is published.

I hope that we can find consensus and agreement. Some concerns have been raised by experts about what might be in the bill; other experts have voiced real support for it. The willingness to work together is there.

Of course, we are investing £250 million over this session of Parliament to tackle drug deaths and, although there is no room for complacency, we have seen in recent statistics a reduction in the number of suspected drug deaths over the months to March 2021.

Going back to other aspects of Douglas Ross’s question, he said, bizarrely, that in my previous answer I did not mention the NHS or the attainment gap; I mentioned both. I pointed to the commissioner for fair access. A core part of tackling the attainment gap is to reduce that inaccess to university, and the independent commissioner has described our progress as an “unambiguous success”. I also mentioned the NHS—the fact that we have record staff numbers and the best-paid staff anywhere in the UK.

Lastly, Douglas Ross should really stop—there is a real desperation at the heart of his approach to independence. It is very telling, is it not, that he is so terrified of the substantive debate on independence—so terrified of the verdict of the Scottish people on independence—that he is reduced to somehow trying to pretend that democracy in Scotland is illegal.

It is not a question of whether this Government respects the rule of law; we do and always will. The question is, is Douglas Ross a democrat? I think that the glaring answer to that is no.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister’s priorities are all wrong at the worst possible time. It is a crucial moment right now for public services and our economy. We have just gone through a pandemic, war in Europe has hiked energy prices and there is a global cost of living crisis. It is time for us all to pull together and focus on improving public services, creating jobs, restoring schools, fighting crime and supporting our NHS.

Scotland has the potential to rebuild stronger. A focus on our recovery is what the Scottish people overwhelmingly want, not a referendum. We need a strong Government for all of Scotland, but we are getting a weak campaign group for the nationalist minority that values grievance over governing. Why is the SNP’s obsession with a referendum next year more important than the priorities of people across Scotland right now?

The First Minister

Independence is about ensuring that we can better meet the priorities of the Scottish people and deal with those challenges. What Douglas Ross needs to reflect on is that so many of the challenges that he has outlined are being exacerbated right now in Scotland because we are not independent.

We were taken out of the European Union against our will. Brexit is why we are suffering the highest inflation in the G7 and the lowest growth of the G20 apart from Russia, and why we are seeing constrained budgets. That is Brexit and that happened to Scotland because we are not independent. People across the country are paying the price of it right now. Independence is the solution.

Lastly, because we are not independent, we currently have a Prime Minister whom even Douglas Ross—well, this is the case today; it might not be tomorrow—does not think is fit for office. The ethics adviser—the second ethics adviser to Boris Johnson who has resigned—said this morning that the Prime Minister

“has placed him in an impossible and odious position.”

Douglas Ross seems to agree with Christopher Geidt that Boris Johnson is putting him in an odious position. The difference between Douglas Ross and Christopher Geidt is that Christopher Geidt has the decency and honour to resign.

Audit Scotland Report (Covid Spending)

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. Today, Audit Scotland has published the latest in a series of damning reports uncovering the Scottish National Party Government’s failures. It shows that the Government made more than 300 spending announcements during the Covid pandemic, but failed to monitor how that money was spent. More than 40 per cent of the additional funding for health and social care that came through Barnett consequentials has not been spent.

The First Minister said at the election that her priority was Covid recovery, but Audit Scotland says that there are billions of pounds of Covid money being “held back” while our public services, businesses and workers are crying out for support.

Why is Covid recovery no longer the First Minister’s priority? Why has that money not been spent? Will the First Minister guarantee that every penny will be spent on rebuilding Scotland?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

That is not what this morning’s Audit Scotland report shows. It is a very good and positive report, and we will pay very close attention to the recommendations that it makes.

Let me share some of what the Audit Scotland report actually says. The Scottish Government spent more on dealing with the pandemic—£15.5 billion—than was allocated through consequentials from the United Kingdom Government. The report goes up only to December 2021 and not to the end of the financial year so, of course, at that time some of the money remained unallocated, Also, the pandemic is, of course, not completely behind us, so we need to continue to support the economy and our public services without consequentials.

The report also says that the Scottish Government

“managed its overall budget effectively”;

that it “developed specific schemes” that were unique in the UK—they did not exist anywhere else in the UK; that it acted with the essential “urgency” and “speed”; that it

“relied on established systems ... to detect”

and reduce fraud in the system; and that it worked well with partners across the country.

The report suggests some lessons that we should learn. As is the case with all aspects of the pandemic, we will ensure that we learn those lessons.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Not for the first time, the First Minister is denying the reality. The report refers to money that was committed but has not been spent, and it makes it clear that although it is a good thing to build reserves, using emergency money to do so is not. It is the equivalent of taking out a payday loan and putting it in a savings account. It does not work and it is not good for Scotland.

This is not the first time that Audit Scotland has highlighted the Government’s incompetence. As is typical with the Scottish National Party Government, there is a culture of contempt for anyone who dares to ask a difficult question or to expose an inconvenient truth. Even when it is one of the SNP’s own members, the party closes ranks and gives them a slap on the wrist.

In the face of uncomfortable truths about its financial mismanagement, SNP figures openly talk of “clipping the wings” of Audit Scotland. The SNP has already cut Audit Scotland’s budget by nearly a fifth since it came to power and the spending review makes it clear that there will be year-on-year cuts to come. Is not it the case that Nicola Sturgeon is cutting Audit Scotland’s budget because it makes it harder for it to do its job and harder for it to expose the Government’s failures, and because it makes it easier for her to get away with it?

The First Minister

Oh, dear. I thought that Anas Sarwar might have done some basic homework before coming to the chamber. I have some news for him: the Scottish Government does not set the budget for Audit Scotland. The budget for Audit Scotland is independently funded through the Scottish Parliament; the audit fees from public bodies pay for it. [

Interruption

.]

I thought that Anas Sarwar might have known that—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members! [

Interruption

.] Mr Swinney! Members! I am sorry; I cannot hear a word that the First Minister is saying, and I am sure that we would all like to hear what is being said

.

The First Minister

I am not sure that Anas Sarwar will want to hear this, but I certainly want him to hear it. The figures in the spending review in relation to Audit Scotland are illustrative because we have to have illustrative figures, but they do not replace the independent processes whereby Parliament scrutinises and determines the budget of Audit Scotland. That is basic stuff that I thought a leader of an Opposition party would have known.

The reserves were fully utilised as part of the 2021-22 budget management process. They were transparently allocated within the budget revisions, and they include the £134 million of Covid funding that was specifically ring fenced for health. No money that is currently in the Scottish reserves relates at all to Covid-19 business support funding. Again, that is basic stuff that I thought a leader of an Opposition party would have known.

Anas Sarwar accuses me of being selective in my quoting of the Audit Scotland report. I have it here and I will read from page 4 of the actual report. It states:

“The Scottish Government worked collaboratively and at pace with local and UK government to direct significant public spending in difficult circumstances. It is critical that lessons are learned about what worked well, and what”

needs to “improve”.

The second point that it makes is that

“the Scottish Government streamlined governance arrangements to direct funds quickly”,

and it goes on to say that

“it is hard to see how some financial decisions were reached”,

but that is because we were acting quickly, because there was a global pandemic.

Thirdly, it says:

“The Scottish Government directed a large proportion of funding to councils and other public bodies who had existing systems and local knowledge to enable them to spend quickly.”

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, First Minister.

The First Minister

Fourthly, the report says:

“The Scottish Government has managed its overall budget effectively”.

Yes—it says that some Covid-19 funding remains unspent, but that is because the report does not go to the end of the financial year. Again, that is really basic stuff that I thought the leader of the Opposition would have known.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Nicola Sturgeon can be as condescending as she likes. We are used to it.

However, the reality is that she is selectively quoting from one page when the report makes it clear that it is not clear where the Covid recovery money is going to be spent, and that there are billions of pounds of reserves sitting in integration joint board accounts or local government accounts. That is money that should be spent on the recovery.

On the spending review, the report makes it clear that year after year there is a standstill budget for the Scottish Parliament and Audit Scotland. That means, in real terms, year-after-year budget cuts for Audit Scotland, which means that its wings are clipped.

It is no wonder that Nicola Sturgeon wants to hide and distract from her failures. She is not focusing on the rising child and pensioner poverty that is happening on her watch. She is not focusing on the drugs deaths that have more than doubled on her watch. She is not focusing on the attainment gap that is still wide open on her watch, and she is not focusing on the 700,000 people on national health service waiting lists on her watch. What do we get? Instead of the Nicola Sturgeon whom we saw during the pandemic, we see a return to the Nicola Sturgeon who wants to divide our country and to pit Scot against Scot. After 15 years of this Scottish National Party Government and eight years as First Minister, when will she stop pretending that she is in Opposition and start governing for the people of Scotland?

The First Minister

Forgive me, Presiding Officer, but when Anas Sarwar comes to the chamber and makes basic errors, it is not “condescending” to point them out. It is not my job to hide the incompetence of the leader of the Scottish Labour Party; it is my job to put facts in front of the Scottish people.

Anas Sarwar talks about this Government’s use of our own powers and he mentioned child poverty. I remind him that Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom that has a child payment specifically to lift children out of poverty. If Anas Sarwar was prepared not to continue to support welfare powers lying in the hands of Tory Prime Ministers and Chancellors of the Exchequer, and would instead help to get them into the hands of this Parliament, we could do more—and he just might have a scrap more credibility.

On Scotland’s right to choose, Anas Sarwar is entitled—although why he would want to do it is beyond me—to team up with the Tories again to oppose independence. That is democracy. What he is not entitled to do is stand in the way of the Scottish people’s democratic right to choose. His position has him at odds with the trade union movement and the Scottish Trades Union Congress. It has him at odds with the constituency that he would like to represent, where 60 per cent of voters backed parties supporting a referendum. It has him at odds with his own party’s membership, as a third of Scottish Labour voters support a second referendum on independence, and with his own MSPs, including Alex Rowley and Monica Lennon. Even Jackie Baillie has said that Labour was wrong to do a deal with the better together campaign in the previous campaign. However, most fundamental is that Anas Sarwar’s absurd position puts him at odds with any basic notion of democracy, which is why he will continue to struggle so badly.

Scottish Breastfeeding Week 2022

Natalie Don (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

How is the Scottish Government supporting Scottish breastfeeding week, and what steps are being taken to promote the breastfeeding friendly Scotland scheme?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Scottish breastfeeding week 2022 is being promoted with a programme of daily events and is supported by national health service boards and third sector partners. The highlight of the week was a breastfeeding celebration event that was held yesterday, at which Maree Todd thanked more than 120 delegates from health boards and the third sector. At that event, we also launched important resources for promotion and protection of and support for breastfeeding in Scotland. A theme that is running throughout the week is promotion of the breastfeeding friendly Scotland scheme. Work continues to promote and expand the scheme from commercial premises including shops and cafes, to early years and school settings, and to our local authorities.

Baby J (Independent Review)

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Baby J was 11 weeks old when he died in West Lothian. In his short life, he suffered multiple broken bones and other injuries that, in a ruling, a judge said could only have been inflicted by his parents. A social worker and a nurse wanted baby J to be placed on the child protection register before he was born, but they were overruled. The judge has expressed surprise that the council did not instruct a serious case review into his death.

That tragedy happened in 2014, but news of it has emerged only thanks to

The Sunday Times

. No one has been held to account, and serious questions remain unanswered. Will the First Minister commit to ensuring that a full and independent review now takes place and that its findings are made public?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The circumstances are tragic and horrific, and I convey my deep condolences to the loved ones of baby J. In such circumstances, it is really important that all lessons be learned fully. There are already independent processes in place to ensure that that is the case.

Of course, I will satisfy myself that all the necessary processes are in place to ensure that all the lessons that need to be learned from the case—clearly, lessons do need to be learned—are learned and that, within the bounds of confidentiality for families, any findings of any of the processes are put into the public domain.

Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

This week is the first-ever

juvenile idiopathic arthritis week. I thank members for their support in promoting it and for wearing purple. I also thank the activists who have shared their personal stories.

One in 1,000 children in Scotland has JIA. I ask the First Minister to join me in thanking organisations such as Versus Arthritis and clinicians who are working tirelessly for the work that they do to support people who are living with JIA in Scotland. What more can the Scottish Government do to raise awareness of the condition?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy for raising this important issue. The first JIA awareness week is a step forward. It is really important and I am delighted to support it.

I am also delighted to accept the invitation to pay tribute to organisations such as Versus Arthritis, which do fantastic work to raise awareness of the issues that people with JIA experience and to support people who are in those circumstances. I give a commitment to continue to work with charities and similar organisations to ensure that we do as much as possible to support people. I would be happy to ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to discuss those issues with Pam Duncan-Glancy, so that we consider everything possible to increase support.

Green Free Ports (North-East Scotland)

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Aberdeen International Airport Ltd, Port of Aberdeen, Peterhead Port Authority, Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council have put together a bid to bring a green free port to the north-east of Scotland. That bid has the potential to boost gross value added income by £7.5 billion, bring 30,000 jobs to the north-east of Scotland and usher in a new era of investment, innovation, regeneration and opportunities for the people who need them most across the region.

I am aware that the First Minister cannot support any particular bid, but will she give a commitment that the Government will give serious consideration to the bid, and will she join me in recognising the huge benefit that it could bring to the north-east of Scotland? [

Applause

.]

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We can hear the north-east contingent in Parliament loudly and clearly.

All bids will be treated extremely seriously. I advise the Parliament that bids for green free port status close on 20 June. All bids will be assessed jointly by the Scottish Government and the United Kingdom Government, with ministers jointly selecting the winning bids. As it is a competitive process, I cannot comment on individual bids at this stage, as Jackie Dunbar indicated. However, I recognise the strong support that she has given to the north-east bid, which is, of course, of great interest to her constituents.

I look forward to receiving strong bids from around Scotland from everyone with ambitious plans that will bring real benefits to Scottish businesses, workers and communities and that will have a positive and lasting impact on Scotland’s economy. A clear contribution to achieving net zero through decarbonisation plans is a core requirement of green free ports. Applications should also demonstrate how they will deliver fair work, or they will not be supported by the Scottish Government.

I take the opportunity to wish all bidders well in the process.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

My constituent Briege Ward-Foley, who suffers from spina bifida, had bladder surgery in April 2019. Since the initial operation, her bowel problems have worsened and the only option is further surgery. Briege is admitted to hospital on a four-weekly basis, as her bowels do not function without a nasogastric tube, but that treatment is damaging and is becoming less effective over time. That experience has taken an immense physical and mental toll on her, and she needs urgent assistance.

Briege’s consultants have informed her that they are prepared for surgery. However, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde continues to delay her vital surgery. What action can the First Minister take to assist my constituent in getting her surgery as quickly as possible?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I thank Annie Wells for raising the issue. As, I hope, she will appreciate, I do not know the details of her constituent’s case other than those that she has just shared with me in Parliament. If she is willing, and if she has the consent of her constituent, to share all the details of the case and any additional relevant information with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care this afternoon, I will ensure that the case is looked into as a matter of urgency and that we liaise with the health board and give a detailed reply to her as quickly as possible.

Police Pay

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

This week, Calum Steele of the Scottish Police Federation described the police pay offer of £565 as “derisory”. He said that police officers are disgusted at the offer and are considering taking action to demonstrate the “palpable anger” that members of the SPF feel. Such a low offer has been made despite the fact that the police have done an exemplary job in the pandemic, and despite the crime figures that the First Minister referred to earlier. I am sure that she gives the police some credit for those figures.

The offer comes despite warnings from the SPF that more than 800 police officers are expected to take early retirement—a higher figure than we would expect—because they feel overworked and undervalued. They refer to constant cancellation of their rest days and annual leave.

If the Government takes the issue seriously, what is the First Minister doing to make sure that police officers do not feel undervalued by the Government? What is she doing to make sure that we encourage police officers to stay in the service and not take advantage of early retirement? We need those offices on the front line.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I pay tribute to police officers and support staff across the country, whose service is exemplary. I give them enormous credit for their contribution not only to the handling of the pandemic, but to the wellbeing of our country.

Pauline McNeill is right to say that the figures that I cited earlier, which show that our crime rates are among the lowest since the 1970s, are in large part down to the efforts of the police. That is why we have a higher number of police officers than we had when the Scottish National Party took office. We have a higher number of police officers proportionately than other parts of the United Kingdom, and the starting salary for police officers is higher in Scotland than it is elsewhere in the UK.

I want all public sector workers to get the fairest possible pay increases, particularly at this time of soaring inflation. Pay negotiations across the public sector are under way, and it is obvious that the Scottish Government—within the very limited resources that we have—is seeking to secure as much fairness as possible. Unlike a Government elsewhere in these islands, we value deeply the contribution of public sector workers.

Specifically in relation to the police, police officer pay is negotiated through the police negotiating board. That has been the case for many years, and that process is on-going in relation to pay for 2022-23. It would not be appropriate for me to cut across that. Following Scottish Police Authority board approval in late May, formal negotiations with trade unions commenced on 2 June. That process is on-going, and I hope that it delivers—I would say this about all groups in the public sector—the fairest possible outcome in the circumstances that we are in.

Northern Ireland Protocol (United Kingdom Government Proposed Legislation)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

3. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s analysis is of the potential risks to Scotland’s economy of the United Kingdom Government’s proposed legislation to override the Northern Ireland protocol. (S6F-01224)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Scottish Government was not consulted by the UK Government before it took that action, which risks a hugely damaging, self-inflicted trade war in the middle of a cost of living crisis and which might well breach international law.

The UK Government is risking sanctions such as targeted tariffs that would deeply harm Scottish businesses, which are already dealing with an uncertain and unnecessarily bureaucratic environment, thanks to Brexit. It is also very likely that the UK Government’s action will end discussions across a range of other important issues, including access for our scientists and researchers to the European Union’s horizon programme.

Brexit has already made the cost of living crisis much worse, but, by sparking a trade war, the UK Government risks exacerbating that crisis significantly. I hope that common sense and decency on the part of the UK Government quickly prevail.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

By seeking to override parts of the Northern Ireland protocol, the UK Government is putting the economic wellbeing of the north of Ireland behind its desire to impose its Brexit-infused British ideology on people. Such unilateral action also damages trust in politics. As the First Minister has said, we know that Brexit is already damaging Scottish businesses. Indeed, some in the north-east, in my region, have decided to stop all international business due to Brexit.

What can we do to ensure that any actions by the EU in response to the UK Government’s riding roughshod over international treaties does not further damage Scotland’s economy? Does the First Minister agree that independence for Scotland is now very clearly the best route to securing our country’s position as an outward-looking and internationally responsible European nation?

The First Minister

Maggie Chapman’s question is absolutely correct, as is everything that she said. Let us not forget that the Northern Ireland protocol was negotiated and signed by the UK Government. It is also a protocol that is now benefiting Northern Ireland, whose economy is doing better than those of the other countries in the UK. If I, as First Minister of Scotland, could get a protocol that would allow Scotland to continue to trade freely across the single market, I would take it in a heartbeat. That is the reality.

We also have a UK Government that is showing no respect for the rule of law, for international law or for the basic norms of our democracy. Earlier, I quoted from the letter from Christopher Geidt, the now-resigned ethics adviser to the Prime Minister. Let me quote another line from it. I do not know whether it refers to the Northern Ireland protocol, but it may do. Lord Geidt says that, this week, he was

“tasked to offer a view about the Government’s intention to consider measures which risk a deliberate and purposeful breach of the Ministerial Code.”

That is how the UK Government is now behaving.

Actually, I slightly disagree with Maggie Chapman. I do not think that independence is now the best route to securing our status in the European Union as an outward-looking country—it is now our only route to doing that.

Responsible Access (Countryside)

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

4. To ask the First Minister, in light of summer officially commencing next week on 21 June, what action the Scottish Government is taking to promote responsible access to Scotland’s countryside. (S6F-01223)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

It is very pleasing to see that summer may have unofficially commenced already in Scotland. Long may it continue.

NatureScot is the lead Scottish Government public body for access to the countryside. It works with the national parks and other key partners on raising awareness of the Scottish outdoor access code. Last year, NatureScot’s traditional and social media activity saw more than 15 million impressions, driving more than half a million page views on the Scottish outdoor access code website. A further campaign is already under way for this summer. It will inform campers of their responsibilities, including around people and pet behaviour, and good practice in relation to fires and waste disposal.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

More people will be enjoying Scotland’s bonnie countryside, but it so important that they do so responsibly. As the First Minister will know, the

Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2021, which is based on my member’s bill, is now law and increases penalties for those who allow dogs to worry or attack livestock. Will she join me in encouraging everyone to follow the Scottish outdoor access code and to keep their dogs under control when they are in the countryside? Will she also join me in commending the vital work of the Scottish partnership against rural crime?

The First Minister

Emma Harper has made important points. Of course, everyone should follow the access code. Indeed, it is worth pointing out that access rights apply to dog walking only if the dog is under proper control.

I also commend the vital work of the Scottish partnership against rural crime. Its livestock attack and distress campaign, which has the slogan “Your Dog—Your Responsibility”, aims to educate dog owners about the new legislation and is key to awareness raising and bringing an end to the associated unnecessary suffering for all involved. Police Scotland and farming and crofting stakeholders combine their efforts to address such crimes, and the Scottish Government also campaigns with the Scottish SPCA. The small minority of people who do not treat livestock with respect and care must be held accountable, and the consequences must appropriately reflect the severity of their crimes.

Nuclear Fusion Technology (Investment)

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on the Scottish Government’s policy regarding investment in nuclear fusion technology. (S6F-01214)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We are aware of the increasing interest in the development of fusion energy, which of course is different from traditional nuclear energy. We should never close our minds to new technology. It is clear, though, that there is still a very long way to go on fully understanding both the risks and the opportunities that fusion energy technology presents.

The Scottish Government’s position on traditional nuclear energy has not changed and will not change. We do not support the building of new nuclear power stations in Scotland, and therefore that will not feature as part of our wider energy strategy review, which is due to be published later this year.

We will continue to assess any such new technologies based on safety, value for consumers and contribution to Scotland’s low-carbon economy and energy future.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the First Minister for that answer, but I note that she is non-committal on fusion and will still use the planning system to shut down Scotland’s traditional nuclear energy industry.

Scientists at the UK-based Joint European Torus have set a new record for the amount of energy produced in its quest to produce nuclear fusion. That offers the potential of virtually unlimited supplies of safe, low-carbon, low-radiation energy. Why will the First Minister not give a guarantee that her Government will allow Scotland to benefit from that technology when it becomes commercially available? Is caving in to the anti-science, anti-nuclear dogma of the Greens yet another price that she will pay for them propping up the Scottish National Party’s plan for an illegal wildcat referendum next October? [

Interruption.

]

The Presiding Officer

Members.

The First Minister

There is a real obsession on the Tory benches today. I think that they might be feeling a wee bit under pressure and uncomfortable because they know that a referendum will be legal and it is coming.

On the issue at stake, however, yes—I am noncommittal on fusion energy. It would be irresponsible to be anything other than that, because there is an awful long way to go before any of us fully understands either the risks or indeed the opportunities that that technology might present. It will probably be decades before we could see any plants operating, and a lot of understanding needs to be built along the way. We will not close our minds, but neither will we jump to conclusions while that work has to be done.

Our position on traditional nuclear energy is well known. Let me quote the chair of the Nuclear Consulting Group:

“The central message, repeated again and again, that a new generation of nuclear will be clean and safe is a fiction. The reality is nuclear is an extremely costly and inflexible technology with the potential to cause significant harm.”

We have massive renewables potential, and this Government is going to focus on making sure that we fully realise that.

National Health Service (Use of Locums)

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to tackle the reported growing use of locum staff in the national health service. (S6F-01228)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The use of temporary staffing in the NHS, be that locum, agency or bank staff, is a very small fraction of NHS staffing. Temporary staff were vital during the height of the pandemic, not least to deliver our vaccination programme.

The majority of the temporary staffing cost comes from the NHS staff bank, who are of course NHS staff members on NHS rates of pay.

Every health system has to make some use of temporary or agency staffing. Let me illustrate that. In 2021, agency spending in NHS England was 23 per cent higher than in Scotland. In Labour-run Wales, agency spending was 79 per cent higher than in Scotland.

NHS staffing in Scotland is at a record high level and, as set out in our recent workforce strategy, we are committed to growing the NHS workforce further.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I thank the First Minister for her response, but I remind her that, of course, people in this chamber are responsible for the NHS in Scotland. Perhaps she should spend her time focusing on that, because agency spend has risen to £423 million in 2021-22, which represents a 30 per cent increase on the previous year. We have had a pandemic, but most of that increase is down to the increasing level of vacancies for nurses, doctors and consultants.

The First Minister may be aware that, currently, nurses are quitting the NHS to work for private agencies that then, in turn, place them back in the NHS to cover staff shortages. They can earn more in a weekend than they do all week working in the NHS. The consequence is more vacancies and more money being wasted on sticking-plaster solutions. What action will the First Minister take to end the costly and growing use of agency staff in our NHS?

The First Minister

First, I am responsible and this Government is responsible for NHS Scotland, but as I have said before—I am sorry to disappoint Labour, as I am sure that I will also say this again—if Labour comes to the chamber to say that it would do things so much better, it is perfectly reasonable to look at the record in the part of the United Kingdom where Labour is currently in government and draw our own conclusions on whether that is true or not.

Secondly, we have a record number of workers in our NHS—even taking account of vacancies; I am talking about staff who are currently in post. The number has increased under this Government by almost 30,000.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

But demand is growing.

The First Minister

Yes, demand is growing. We have had a pandemic. That has meant that some workers in our NHS have been off sick, due to having Covid, and that additional things—not least, the vaccination programme—have had to be undertaken. I do not know what Jackie Baillie is suggesting. Should we just have left those posts somehow unfilled and not had those service delivered? Is that what a Labour Government would do? If that is the case, people will certainly draw conclusions from that.

I come to my final two points, Presiding Officer. The majority of temporary staffing comes from the staff bank. Those are NHS staff on NHS contracts at NHS rates of pay. Jackie Baillie asked me what action we are taking. We have already acted to ensure that there is a record number of staff in our NHS—higher, proportionately, than in England or Wales—and we will continue to grow the NHS workforce so that it can meet the demands of the people of Scotland in the years to come.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business, which is a members’ business debate in the name of Christine Grahame.

Men’s Sheds

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 we are still in session.

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-03064, in the name of Christine Grahame, on “Men Don’t Talk”. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons now or as soon as possible.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament recognises the work that has gone into producing the one-act play,

Men Don’t Talk

, by Clare Prenton, who is based in Peebles; understands that Clare based this play on the experiences of those involved with Peebles Men’s Shed and conducted a number of workshops with members to inform the storyline, which was written and developed over two years; further understands that it explores the myth that men do not talk, in a fictional Men's Shed setting, discussing such issues as loneliness, alcoholism and recovery, loss of a life partner, caring for a partner with dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from previous service in the Armed Forces, and where the next supply of jaffa cakes is coming from; notes that this was made possible by funding from the Peebles-based charity, Inspiring Life—Evie Douglas Memorial Fund, which was set up by Freda Douglas in memory of her daughter Evie; congratulates those involved, on the play coming to fruition in January 2022, with a rehearsed reading at The Eastgate Theatre in Peebles, employing a professional cast of three actors and the services of one local amateur, who helped with the stage direction, in front of an audience of over 70 people; believes that projects such as this celebrate community collaboration and are an important part of raising awareness of issues around mental health, particularly among those in society who may be less comfortable in engaging in conventional support for this, and considers that organisations such as Men’s Sheds are a vital support for many in Scotland’s communities.

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

I thank the Presiding Officer for the pause to allow members to enter the chamber.

It is with great pleasure that I lead my debate on men’s sheds. I add that this is not the first time, as I led a debate on the same topic in 2019, and contributed to another in 2021. I thank members for signing the motion and, in advance, for contributing today. I also welcome to the gallery members of the Peebles and District men’s shed and the Penicuik and District men’s shed, which are in my constituency. I visited both pre-Covid and hope to do so again. There are also sheds in Lauder and Galashiels.

All men’s sheds have much in common, and their members have a wide range of experience, which is very handy—for example, there may be an accountant who can search out funding streams; a retired lawyer, if you are lucky—although not many people say that about lawyers—who can help with the legal stuff; and men with experience of trades. Collectively, they make a powerful functioning organisation.

The name “shed” is so apt. I recall that my father had his own one-man shed plonked right in the middle of the back garden. He would retreat there from our large and noisy family with the Sunday papers and sit in the open doorway at peace with the world, or he would disappear inside to make sledges for us that were so heavy that they would not move through the snow. There were also shelves that were constructed to survive an earthquake. Woodwork was not a talent of his, but he was happy. When men’s sheds came on the scene, I immediately recognised the benefits.

The play “Men Don’t Talk” by Clare Prenton was born out of discussions with Peebles men’s shed members, and it prompted me yet again to highlight again the importance of men’s sheds. Men talk there, and the play explores what they talk about, including a range of small, medium and large issues. By “large”, I mean issues of loneliness, bereavement, dementia and so on—all discussed while they hammer away at bird boxes, planters and garden benches that are mostly for community use, accompanied, of course, by the obligatory cups of tea and coffee and biscuits. Lest I forget, I should make it plain that Peebles men’s shed also provides for women members.

I thank the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association for its briefing, and note that there are 201 known men’s sheds and developing groups across Scotland—129 open sheds, 47 that are in development and 25 that are proposed. The pandemic meant that some sheds have gone, but post-pandemic there is an even greater need for them, as we can see from the sheds that are proposed and in development. Incidentally, the SMSA has an excellent website to guide those interested in the dos and don’ts of establishing a shed.

I now welcome more people to the public gallery—you missed a bit, but you can see it online later.

There is no dispute that men’s sheds do a power of good, and I am not just talking about bird boxes and benches. The companionship is good for body and soul, and is much needed, especially after the last two dreadful years.

I know that you would have wanted to take part in this debate, Deputy Presiding Officer, so I thought that I would say what you would have said; besides, I have family connections to Orkney through a sister, which I think gives me sufficient authority to deputise for you. I am deputising for the deputy—how nice. Here is the jist of what you told me.

Orkney men’s shed, like others, found securing premises difficult, but having at last found a location in Finstown, which is midway between Stromness and Kirkwall, and thus central and ideal, it has had to relocate to Stromness.

A hard-working team of volunteers led by Morgan Harcus has quickly enabled Orkney men’s shed to prove its worth to members and the wider community. The concept is making its way north of the Galt, with plans for the Sanday men’s shed well advanced. Given the risks of isolation and poor mental health, there is no reason at all why that model could not be replicated on other islands, albeit tailored to meet the circumstances, demand and personalities in each community.

I trust that, if I run out of time, I will get a little more time for that.

However—the minister will know where I am going with this—funding for sheds has to be raised through the Big Lottery Fund and so on. That is time consuming and exhausting, and finding suitable premises is a common challenge—it is not just a challenge in Orkney. That was true in Peebles, where premises were secured in the former ex-servicemen’s club, and in Penicuik, where, after years, a place has just been secured in the YMCA. Local authorities can help with that, and they often do.

The Scottish Government is quite right to face up to the challenges of the population’s health and wellbeing, especially the health and wellbeing of older people. Keeping folk fit in body and mind is not only the right thing to do; it can save more than pennies for the public purse, especially the health budget. Therefore, it seems to me—I am glad that the minister is listening—that there is a requirement for a more proactive role for Government in supporting the men’s shed movement. I am aware that there was a meeting with the SMSA earlier this year to discuss a new funding strategy for men’s sheds. A trilateral funding approach in the budgets of the Minister for Public Finance, Planning and Community Wealth, the Minster for Equalities and Older People, and the Minister for Mental Wellbeing and Social Care was looked at.

I understand that the minister has responded to a request for three-year funding, and I appreciate that the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association is disappointed to receive only one-year funding. However, these are extraordinary times, and there are severe financial pressures on all budgets. As my mother used to say, “It’s better to get something than nothing.” I note that the minister has suggested that the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association should apply for funding to explore the upcoming social isolation and loneliness fund. I encourage it to do that.

If allowed, I will be back again in a year’s time in another men’s shed debate looking to see that more funding is secured for that very important organisation and all the individuals who give up their time to develop men’s sheds throughout Scotland.

I am glad that the minister is listening, and I hope that the Deputy Presiding Officer is happy.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you very much, Ms Grahame. It is always a pleasure to be able to put words in your mouth.

There is, quite understandably, a lot of demand to speak in this debate, and I am conscious that business will resume at 2 pm, after lunch. We do not have an awful lot of time, so I would be grateful if members stuck to their four-minute allocation.

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

I thank Christine Grahame for lodging an important motion, which eloquently describes the commitment behind creating the “Men Don’t Talk” one-act play. The storyline development, the issues that the play explores and the funding support have all helped to create an opportunity to raise awareness of mental health and the vital role of men’s sheds in many of Scotland’s communities. What struck me about the motion is the really creative and positive relationship between the Peebles men’s shed, the playwright Clare Prenton, the Inspiring Life—Evie Douglas Memorial Fund, and the Eastgate theatre in Peebles, which clearly brought significant positive benefits to everyone involved in the project.

Age Scotland has described a men’s shed as

“a safe social space for all men with time on their hands, to come together to socialise”

and undertake

“purposeful activities ... for themselves or for their ... community.”

It continued:

“sheds aim to provide positive views of aging and later life, tackle loneliness and isolation and help older”

men

“to be as well as they can be.”

I am sure that most—if not all—MSPs who have supported Christine Grahame’s motion will have a special relationship with men’s sheds in their constituencies and regions. My Aberdeen South and North Kincardine constituency hosts three sheds, which I will drop into over the summer.

Earlier this year, I spoke about the Portlethen and District men’s shed in a speech about veterans and mental health and wellbeing. Cliff and John, who are both shedders and veterans, are testimony to the role that the shed plays in helping men to access their social network of friends.

Recently, my colleague Jackie Dunbar lodged a motion to celebrate global intergenerational week. In that debate, I spoke about the work of one shedder who has created doodle boards for a local primary school, putting his practical skills to very good use, recycling materials such as wood and supporting children to learn while developing their sensory practice.

However, the reach of that particular shed is much wider, as evidenced by the dementia-friendly garden that they maintain, the planters that they have made for their local railway station and the benches that they are currently making—out of mahogany, no less—to be placed outside the local chemist for older people to sit on when they are waiting for their prescriptions. Those are all activities that enable men to come together with their peers, neighbours and even strangers, and talk.

Of course, the context of today’s debate addresses the scenario not so much of “Men don’t talk” as maybe also “Men don’t want to talk or don’t feel able to talk.”

A recent American study on the role of men’s sheds in health promotion for older men highlighted the importance of an informal, male-friendly and safe shed environment that helps them to open up and talk about health issues in a comfortable and secure way.

By sharing their individual health and illness experiences with their peer group, men gain social support, which helps them to deal with their health issues, and in particular their mental health issues. I have it on good authority that my friends at the Portlethen men’s shed are more than happy to talk quite frequently about their waterworks, including the number of times they go to the loo in the evening and which treatment works best—wonderful stuff.

The study also suggests that a successful men’s shed must be supported by the availability of good shed facilities and, as Christine Grahame highlighted, sufficient funding and a management arrangement driven by shedders that enables them to make their own decisions—for example, which projects they want to work on.

I thank Christine Grahame for lodging the motion and I look forward to visiting Portlethen men’s shed, Cove and Altens men’s shed and Culter and District men’s shed during recess for a bit of summer talk.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I welcome Christine Grahame’s guests to the public gallery and thank her for securing this debate and for the opportunity that it has given Parliament to discuss men’s health week as well as Clare Prenton’s play “Men Don’t Talk” and the work of men’s sheds in general across Scotland.

As Christine Grahame has outlined, Clare Prenton produced the one-act play “Men Don’t Talk” after conducting a number of workshops with groups from the men’s shed in Peebles. That work shows the huge benefit of men’s sheds, which I hope that we can all acknowledge today. “Men Don’t Talk” highlights the work that men’s sheds such as Peebles and District men’s shed do and helps to dispel the myth that men do not talk. Rather, men talk in a place and at a time when they feel comfortable to do so, which is why men’s sheds and other community projects are so essential to all our communities.

The debate is taking place during men’s health week, which is about raising awareness of health problems that disproportionately affect men. Men’s shed organisations across the country are indeed a vital source of support, friendship, relief and comfort to many and provide that strong support network that men often feel—particularly in today’s technologically driven world—that they are not necessarily connected to. It is important that that human contact is really looked at.

Men’s sheds provide an excellent opportunity to act early in the work that needs to take place to address people’s depression, relationship breakdowns and male suicide, particularly for men in Scotland from the poorest social backgrounds, who are often the most vulnerable due to issues around unemployment and poor social conditions.

The figures surrounding mental health and suicide among men in Scotland are shocking—we have had many debates on that—and I think that men’s sheds have a positive role to play in that jigsaw of how we find a solution.

In Scotland today, more young people under the age of 29 die by suicide than from all types of cancer combined. In 2020, 71 per cent of all suicides recorded were men, further illustrating the disproportionately high number of suicides among men in Scotland.

In my Lothian region, between 2016 and 2020, more than 500 people died from suicide, with 389—70 per cent—of those being men, which aligns with the national average. I recently met with the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association at its Banchory headquarters to discuss the challenges that face the charity, the work that it can do to help to turn around some of those problems, and the role that it needs to play in helping us to address them.

Anyone who has interacted with a men’s shed will know how their work is making a huge impact on local men in every community, and that the model is working well in rural and urban Scotland. Edinburgh and the Lothians, which I represent, are fortunate to have a number of men’s shed associations operating in the area, but we need to look at how we can further expand them, which I think is an important part of what this debate can help to achieve.

The debate shows how members’ business debates can drive change. The member has managed to do that because, yesterday, the minister responded to the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association to indicate that the Scottish Government will make available £75,000 of core funding. As Christine Grahame has outlined, that is fine for staffing, but we need a future commitment on support. I hope that the debate can help the three-year funding request that was put forward and rejected to be revisited, and that ministers will look towards the development of a future sustainable financial package, because it is hugely important for that to happen if men’s sheds are to be sustainable and expanded.

With just under 3,000 individual members and a pre-Covid engagement of about 10,000 members across Scotland, the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association is the largest and fastest growing member-led men’s health charity in Scotland—we should celebrate that. Therefore, it is vital that we look towards how its work will be expanded.

I thank Christine Grahame and Clare Prenton for bringing the work of men’s sheds to the attention of the Parliament. I will close with an important quote from another woman, the actress Glenn Close, that sums up the issue quite nicely. She said:

“What mental health needs is more sunlight, more candour, and more unashamed conversation.”

I sincerely hope that, by next year, when we celebrate the 10th anniversary of the first men’s shed in Scotland, and when, I hope, the pandemic will be behind us, we can tackle issues of men’s health and wellbeing with more sunlight, more candour and more unashamed conversation.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I know that it is not in keeping with members’ business debates to be too strict on time limits, but we are under the pump, because business is starting at 2 o’clock. If members could stick to their four minutes, I would be very grateful.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

I thank my colleague Christine Grahame for securing this important debate.

We all know that most men don’t talk as much as they should, but why not? In the past, men were not encouraged to talk about their feelings. In fact, they were often actively discouraged from doing so. Over the years, men have been conditioned not to talk about their fears, emotions or feelings.

I believe that two simple words have had the greatest detrimental effect on how comfortable men feel talking about their problems and experiences: “man up”. The inference of that phrase is that men should be strong, should not show their feelings, should not cry and are expected to get through their problems on their own. The words are often thrown around without any thought being given to the damage that they inflict, not just to the person on the receiving end but to wider society and to future generations.

Historically, men have been taught to hide their physical, mental and emotional pain, and society has made it difficult for men to discuss topics of personal importance, favouring instead impersonal matters such as sports or popular culture. It is encouraging to see that our younger generations appear to be more open to talking about mental health, thanks in part to the media presence that mental health now has, and to social media, which can be a lifeline for people who feel isolated. I am reassured to see just how far things have progressed since I was a boy, but there is still much work to be done to challenge the cultural stereotype that exists in our society and to avoid the trap of toxic masculinity.

Startling research from the men’s health charity Movember finds that nearly a third of men say that they feel pressure to be manly or masculine. To maintain the appearance of manliness, the research finds that 38 percent of men do not talk to others about their feelings, and that almost three in 10 men have never shown emotion or cried in front of others. That pressure to repress emotion can have devastating consequences on mental health, and may even stop some men from seeing a healthcare professional about physical or mental health problems.

That inability or unwillingness to reach out to friends, family or health professionals can have devastating results. The statistics surrounding the issue of male suicide are truly heartbreaking to read. Figures from National Records of Scotland show that one in four men have thought about taking their own life; in 2020, 71 per cent of all suicides were men; in every year since 1985, more than 70 per cent of people dying from suicide have been male; and 43 per cent of men wish that they could talk more to others about their personal problems. It can be a vicious cycle: men don’t talk about mental health because there is a stigma, but until more men talk about it, the stigma will remain.

That is why organisations such as men’s sheds are very important. They provide a safe and supportive environment that fosters discussion and encourages shoulder-to-shoulder chats. They cater to the unique needs of men, while recognising that many men find it difficult to discuss their personal thoughts and feelings head-on.

As I have mentioned in the chamber previously, my constituency is the home of the Kirkcaldy and District men’s shed. On the previous occasion that I stood here highlighting its invaluable contribution to the local community, I described how its members had been victim to a robbery in which their equipment, tools and electrical generators were stolen, rendering them powerless. I am delighted to report that they have not only recovered from that crime; they have gone from strength to strength. The group has now secured and moved into its own premises, and as a result membership has increased greatly in recent months.

The group’s community open day last month was a great success, with a number of men coming along to find out more about what it does. It was great to see the local reaction to national issues. In Kirkcaldy, there are now a number of groups that address men’s mental health, including Pete’s man chat movement and Andy’s Man Club, all of which are helping to reaffirm the message that, “It’s okay to talk”.

We must continue to challenge, change and empower our fathers, brothers, sons and friends so that all their voices are heard, and so that future generations of men and boys will grow up feeling confident in talking about and expressing their emotions, asking for help when they need it and discussing topics that they never dared to discuss before. When men get together and start to talk about the issues that really matter, the results can be astounding.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I thank Christine Grahame for bringing the debate to the chamber. From what we have heard, I am in no doubt that the play “Men Don’t Talk”, by Clare Prenton, goes a long way towards dispelling the myths that persist in our society that men don’t talk, and the stigma that persists around how men deal with their feelings. I congratulate Clare Prenton on that important piece of work. The fact that she went into a community and worked hand in hand with a men’s shed to inform the play can only mean that it gives a piercing insight into the worries and angst of so many men, even if that sometimes extends to discussing who is next to do the dreaded trip to the shops.

I agree with Christine Grahame that projects such as “Men Don’t Talk” are an excellent example of community collaboration and play an important role in raising awareness in society among those who may be less comfortable in engaging with conventional support. If the performance travels further north at some point in time, I think that we would all be delighted to attend a showing. Perhaps we could even do so in the Parliament in the future.

In my community, we are fortunate enough to have access to our own men’s shed just down the road in Barrhead. It is a community that the minister knows well—indeed, he and I have visited that excellent facility. We have not yet been encouraged by the members to take up woodwork, but that may well happen in the future—although I am not entirely confident about my abilities in that regard.

The community men’s shed in Barrhead does so much more than provide a space for crafting and woodwork. It provides a lifeline to many in our community, and enables older people—both men and women—to come together and share a space with one another. The Barrhead men’s shed does amazing work, and we can all learn so much from its members’ example of kindness and respect to all. Every time that I have visited, I have felt that warmth and kindness, and the real buzz that exists around the place with people coming together.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member take an intervention?

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I do not know whether I have time.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You would have to take it in your allotted time.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I will not, if that is okay, so as to keep on the right side of the Presiding Officer.

I will share with members a few quotes that have come directly from the members of the shed in Barrhead. I think that these quotes typify what the shed means to them. One person said:

“It may just be a shed to you, but to me—it’s my Sanctuary.”

Another said:

“The men’s shed has been my life saver since my wife died.”

From those quotes, it is clear to me that we need to do as much as we can to provide support for these organisations, which, for some people, are indeed a lifeline.

As other members have said, it is not rocket science. It is a model that has, in some ways, always been around, but the difference that it makes is huge. As Christine Grahame said, we need to think about the preventative spend aspect, particularly with regard to the savings to the health budget.

We have heard from other members about the issues of funding and the sustainability of men’s sheds. Sustainability of funding is crucial, and I know that it worries many people who are active in the men’s shed movement. We have heard about some of the national issues that the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association is experiencing, and I hope that the minister will pick up on those in his concluding remarks.

There are also issues at a local level in relation to support and the funding for leasing the buildings that men’s sheds occupy, with councils sometimes dragging their heels when it comes to making decisions on future support. We need to explore further the asset transfer framework in the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015. The men’s shed in Barrhead has raised issues about the validation certificate and the length of time that it can take to have that confirmed, the uncertainty that it creates when it comes to applying to funders, and the group’s desire to have a sense of control over the buildings that it occupies. I am conscious of time, so I hope that the minister will be able to respond to that issue, or perhaps take it offline with me.

Next year, the Scottish men’s shed movement will celebrate the 10th year since the first ever men’s shed opened in 2013. Since then, from Barrhead to Ullapool, the movement has gone from strength to strength, and that should be celebrated. I look forward to us all coming together in the Parliament next year, with perhaps even more guests from men’s sheds from across the country, to celebrate that milestone.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr O’Kane. I am sure that if you can operate a kettle, you will be very welcome in the Barrhead men’s shed.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

I thank Christine Grahame for bringing this important topic to the chamber and highlighting the positive impact of men’s sheds. I also welcome the shedders who are in the gallery, and I congratulate Clare Prenton, Inspiring Life and the gentlemen of Peebles and District men’s shed, who collaborated to create and produce “Men Don’t Talk”.

According to the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association, there are 127 established men’s sheds in Scotland, three of which are in my constituency. They are Three Towns men’s shed, Irvine Harbourside men’s shed and Irvine Newtown men’s shed, which, in September 2019, along with Garnock Valley men’s shed, created the Ayrshire men’s shed network.

A man’s shed might conjure up the image of a lone man making or mending items by hand, content at the bottom of his garden, and away from the family, as Christine Grahame said. However, what we are talking about today is a wee bit different. Men’s sheds are about social connections, friendship building, sharing skills and knowledge, banter and, of course, a biscuit or two.

We all know that men’s health can be overlooked, with men being more predisposed to physical illness and injury, on top of being vastly more susceptible than women to mental health problems and suicide. It is often reported that men are less likely to access professional interventions. Men’s sheds raise awareness and encourage shedders to look after themselves and seek help when needed.

The Three Towns men’s shed, in conjunction with other organisations, co-ordinated a very successful men’s wellbeing event, which featured the Prostate Scotland virtual toolbox workshop to raise awareness of prostate disease.

The Scottish Shedder

, the official free magazine of the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association, not only promotes news from men’s sheds across Scotland to showcase their successes, but includes a health section, which promotes topics from first aid to the benefits of physical activity and support services. It also includes personal stories from men on how becoming a member of their local shed helped to turn their lives around.

With an increase in online activities and the use of social media, one particular area of concern for men is social isolation and loneliness. As I am sure we can all understand, that was exacerbated during lockdown, when there were limited social interactions and community spaces were closed.

Organisations such as Age Scotland herald men’s sheds for offering opportunities to interact meaningfully with others. What is more, many sheds get involved in community projects such as restoring village features, helping to maintain parks and green spaces, and building things for schools, libraries and individuals in need.

At the end of last year, Irvine Harbourside men’s shed were made aware of a young apprentice joiner in the town who did not have any tools. It quickly stepped in to help by gifting a tool bag and basic toolkit to get him started. It also recently made planters and a bookshelf for the Puffer cafe at the Scottish Maritime Museum in Irvine.

The Three Towns men’s shed runs evening classes that provide basic do-it-yourself skills, camera skills and painting and decorating advice, which allow members to share their skill set with the wider community.

Irvine Newtown men’s shed turned pallets donated by a local business into fabulous benches, decorations and planters for the garden at Dreghorn library.

Men’s sheds are vital. They are community spaces for men to connect, converse and create. They help reduce loneliness and isolation and take into consideration differing male behaviours and the attitudes towards men’s physical and mental health. More importantly, they are fun and I wish them all the best.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I thank Christine Grahame for lodging her motion and securing the debate.

The patriarchy does not hurt only women. The myth of masculinity, which a 2013 study of men’s sheds described as

“physical dominance, emotional control and achievement through paid work”

completely fails to respect or acknowledge the reality of men’s lives, emotions, relationships, needs and experiences. It is perhaps no coincidence that the men’s shed movement originated in Australia, a repository of so many patriarchal fantasies, or that it has taken such root in Scotland, where we are, I hope, beginning to recognise that all of us, regardless of gender, can talk, feel and cry.

As a member for the North East region, I am fortunate to represent the members of many wonderful men’s sheds. We have men’s and community sheds in our cities, from Lochee in Dundee to Bridge of Don in Aberdeen; in towns across Aberdeenshire and Angus, from Banchory to Brechin and from Fraserburgh to Forfar and in many village and rural communities. Some, such as the Carse of Gowrie men’s shed, which meets in Dundee’s technology park, bring the city and countryside together.

Whatever their setting, men’s sheds fulfil the same core functions, providing a place for people to meet and talk, to share skills, projects and ideas and to be active in the company of others. Some, such as the Westhill shed, host talks by experts in local history and health issues, while the one in Inverurie has a music group. The connections between activity, social relationships and good physical and mental health are well established, and men’s sheds play a vital role in supporting their members’ wellbeing, in body, mind and spirit.

Men’s sheds benefit more than their own members. They provide huge benefits to their local communities, as analysed by the Gable Endies men’s shed in Montrose, and to the wider world. Many of the concepts that we discuss in this Parliament and the changes that we want to see happen are already being dealt with quietly, practically and wisely by men’s sheds.

Reuse, repair and recycle is not just an aspiration for the men’s sheds of the North East, it is a daily reality. Across the region, tools, machines and furniture are rescued, refurbished and returned to active use and love. Peterhead men’s shed even refits boats, while the one at Ferryhill is linked with the Railway Heritage Trust.

Men’s sheds meet community needs in immediate and practical ways. In Turiff, they built children’s picnic tables and Banff and Macduff built a mud kitchen, both for local primary schools. That positive relationship with local schools is replicated in many communities through teaching and doing woodworking, gardening and more.

Men’s sheds have long addressed the crises of food insecurity and poverty. Ellon men’s shed, like many others, has a polytunnel and raised beds, while Alford produces vegetable and herb plants for sale. Men’s sheds can address global needs too: in Broughty Ferry hand tools are collected, refurbished and shipped to Malawi, where they are a vital resource for communities. It is inspiring.

As we have heard, men’s sheds themselves face challenges, both institutionally and to their individual members. The Covid pandemic has had a deeply damaging effect on capacity, with many still waiting to resume their previous projects. Health issues, both physical and mental, the cost of living crisis and growing pension poverty limit many men’s engagement with their local sheds. There are also challenges of inclusion, while some communities that could benefit from men’s sheds are yet to be reached.

In reflecting on the wonderful achievements of men’s sheds in the North East, across Scotland and the world, we should ask ourselves how we can do more. How can the decisions that we make in this Parliament, the priorities that we decide upon and the messages that we send support and extend the vital work of men’s sheds, now and into the future? I look forward to continuing the discussion.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

It is a pleasure to speak in the debate, and I congratulate Christine Grahame on securing it and giving the Parliament the opportunity to commend the positive contribution made by men’s sheds to the wider community.

I agree with Christine that men’s sheds are a vital support to Scotland’s communities and I am pleased to have signed and to support the motion in her name.

As the member for Clydebank and Milngavie, I am pleased to advise the Parliament that I have two men’s sheds in my constituency: the men’s shed in Clydebank and the Milngavie and Bearsden shed in Bearsden. The Milngavie and Bearsden shed is in the pagoda of the King George V park in Bearsden, and it was only after an extensive search that the group’s initial trustees identified the former tennis changing rooms—that is, the pagoda—as a possible home. After a year of negotiations with East Dunbartonshire Council, they got the keys of the derelict building in April 2018, and the building itself has been lovingly restored by the group with the support of a grant from East Dunbartonshire health and social care partnership.

The shed in Clydebank was formerly some school huts in the grounds of Dalmuir community centre, and the group has recently managed to secure another hut from West Dunbartonshire Council and is in the process of refurbishing it. It is great to see these derelict buildings being brought back into use.

I have had the privilege of visiting both sheds and have spent an enjoyable time listening to my constituents tell me how the resource plays such an important part in their lives. Some of the men told me that attending the men’s shed gave them a purpose, and it is clear that our local communities gain tremendously from them, too. I particularly want to thank Mick Wilson for hosting my visit to Clydebank and Hamish Livingstone at the Milngavie and Bearsden shed. It was wonderful to meet them and the other men who were there. We had a great chat and a really enjoyable day.

I came away from those visits, clear about the good that these facilities are doing for my constituents. The support was there when they needed it most, frequently as an antidote to social isolation and poor mental health. In both of my visits, the men talked about the mental and physical health benefits of attending the sheds. Some of them had recently retired, which meant that they had a lot of time on their hands compared to when they were working. Attending the shed helped reduce their social isolation and gave them an opportunity to speak to other men and, indeed, to be creative—and, oh boy, are they creative. They come from many trades—there are, for example, ex-joiners and painters—and they can turn their hands to absolutely anything and do it effortlessly.

Covid-19 placed such a strain on mental health and unfortunately increased social isolation, and I admired the way in which the men tried to keep in touch during that time. Having made lasting friendships, they recognised the importance of that contact, and their feelings of relief and happiness were obvious when they finally got to meet again in the shed with the easing of the Covid-19 restrictions. It was an honour to be invited to the re-opening celebration of the shed in Clydebank, and I was pleased to show my support for their community endeavour.

The commitment of the men’s sheds to our community is widely recognised and highly valued. Both sheds are very connected to the wider community; for example, the Milngavie and Bearsden shed in East Dunbartonshire has supported Milngavie in bloom with a floral arrangement outside the Fraser centre, and the men have also constructed an outside canopy for Gavin’s Mill and helped Bearsden in bloom. In Clydebank, the men are very active in their community, supporting local groups, particularly Old Kilpatrick Food Parcels. Both organisations help each other in kind, and the way in which they are there for each other sets a really great example of how to foster community spirit.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to thank both men’s sheds in my constituency; indeed, we are very fortunate to have two of them. I have nothing but the highest praise for them and, as a constituency MSP, I will be a very strong supporter of them.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am conscious of the number of speakers who still want to contribute to the debate, so I am minded to accept a motion under rule 8.14.3 to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes.

Motion moved,

That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[

Christine Grahame

]

Motion agreed to.

That is excellent. Of course, it is not an invitation to members to go beyond their four minutes.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Challenge accepted, Presiding Officer.

It was a pleasure to support the motion when it was lodged by the member for Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale. I am delighted that the motion achieved enough support for a debate in the chamber, and I congratulate the member on that. I also congratulate all those who were involved in producing “Men Don’t Talk”. I hope that they are rightly proud of their work and that they continue to enjoy much success in such a worthwhile endeavour.

I am also grateful for the opportunity to pay tribute to men’s sheds across Scotland—more specifically, in Glasgow and, in particular, the Springburn park men’s shed in north Glasgow, with which I have had a close association in recent years. Led by the fantastic Tom Bennett, it took over an abandoned Romney hut at a council depot in the park and was formally established as a men’s shed in August 2018. Since then, it has grown exponentially as a supportive environment for men in the local area, as well as a wonderfully creative and generous community initiative.

Springburn park men’s shed is a wonderful example of the ideals and missions of the general men’s sheds project in Scotland: to provide valuable services in the community and a means for men to share their skills and knowledge with others. The men’s shed has worked brilliantly with local business to reuse excess material in order to benefit the community, such as in the construction of new mental health wards at Stobhill hospital, which is just half a mile away. Surplus materials, including portakabins, were used to extend the men’s shed complex and build a community library, tea station and kitchen facilities. The men’s shed has grown arms and legs thanks to construction companies such as BAM Construct UK supporting it in such a practical and meaningful way. The men’s shed has used those investments by private businesses and the council to secure positive impacts for the community across all generations. For example, the men’s shedders regularly visit primary schools to install outdoor play equipment, including mud kitchens—I am not sure what those are, but they are, apparently, very popular with children. The men’s shed also offers a handyman service for elderly and infirm people on Mondays and Fridays, which is really important and is booked up until August.

That is a real issue that we need to face in our communities. As statutory services face real financial pressure and council budgets for housing and garden maintenance are cut back, an increasing reliance on that sort of good will is building up informally in communities. Although I deprecate cuts to public services, we must recognise the importance of community resilience, and the men’s sheds are a fantastic example of where community good will can come to the fore and help to ensure that people’s wellbeing and lives in the community are sustained. That is particularly important for those who are infirm and unable to fully maintain their properties. Springburn park men’s shed also provides fantastic one-off projects for great local causes, including building a Santa’s sleigh for a local children’s hospice and providing garden furniture to the Marie Curie hospice at Stobhill hospital. The projects were all well received and the organisations were grateful for that work.

Members across the chamber have raised points about what the play “Men Don’t Talk” means in essence. It is about how men’s mental health must be treated differently, particularly with regard to men from an older generation. Purpose, fulfilment, satisfaction, self-esteem, companionship and friendship are the key attributes of men’s sheds, and they are so important. That also has to be understood in the context of our wider mental health and care strategies in Scotland. We have a tendency to overmedicalise things, but we must recognise that the normalisation of these softer approaches is critical to avoiding costs elsewhere in our public services, particularly in the national health service.

I hope that the minister will take on board this opportunity for cost avoidance, because the often precarious nature of the funding that men’s sheds get is not helpful. There can be a virtuous rather than vicious circle in how we approach the funding of these great community assets. It is not just about maintaining our properties and ensuring resilience in our communities; it is also, fundamentally, about ensuring the resilience of a generation. Men’s sheds build connections and skills across generations and with young people, and they ensure that we have a more robust and resilient community across Scotland.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I thank Christine Grahame for securing the debate this afternoon.

Last night, I hosted the Scottish Mental Health Partnership, which launched a paper on the forthcoming Scottish mental health strategy refresh. Last week, I held a similar event with the Scottish Social Prescribing Network, which looked at the role of link workers and other professionals in that sector. At both events, there were discussions about how to engage with men, who sometimes find it difficult to talk.

There are a number of men’s sheds in East Lothian, including those in Dunbar, East Linton, Macmerry, North Berwick and Haddington. As has been mentioned, there are around 10,000 shedders in Scotland, across all our local authorities.

The Scottish Men’s Sheds Association website states:

“Men’s Sheds respond to men’s need for camaraderie and provide opportunities to work together in a way that contributes meaning to their lives and their communities.”

The Scottish Men’s Sheds Association also partners with other organisations. For example, this week, the association teamed up with Scotmid to offer Scottish men’s sheds a promotional opportunity in 35 Scotmid stores during men’s health week. Scotmid stores offered a full-day exhibition space to accommodate a 6-foot table and up to two shed representatives.

Moray-based professional theatre company Right Lines Productions will also be partnering with Edinburgh festival fringe this August, as part of the Pleasance Theatre Trust’s Edinburgh national partnerships programme. It has a brand new production that will debut at the Edinburgh festival fringe, which is called “Man Shed”. The show is prefaced with the following:

“How does a man find his purpose when he grows old and major life events come thick and fast? Should he retire to the solitude of The Shed as usual and escape from the world, or get out and try something new? When the familiar rules no longer apply, is it too late to change the habits of a lifetime?”

The play is described in this way:

“Man Shed is a bitter-sweet one-man theatre piece which explores the joy of sheds, the pain of loss and the comfort of friendship. The play has been inspired by Men’s Sheds around the world, but more specifically by the work of the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association.”

The play runs throughout August at the Pleasance theatre, and I encourage members to see it if they possibly can.

Another fantastic organisation that helps with men’s mental health is Andy’s Man Club, which is a men’s mental health charity that offers free-to-attend talking groups for men and that challenges the stigma around men’s mental health. Andy’s Man Club was set up by Luke Amber after the tragic loss of his brother-in-law Andy in 2016. He and Andy’s mum, Elaine, wanted to prevent other families from going through what they had gone through. The idea was that, to prevent families going through the same thing, they had to help other guys—and Andy’s Man Club was born. Last week, I watched a group of men take part in the Dunbar civic week parade under the banner of Andy’s Man Club. I was humbled to attend one of its meetings, where, as men, we all talked openly about our mental health issues.

There is still stigma associated with talking about men’s mental health—feelings of weakness, being a burden or embarrassment—and that is what prevents men from speaking out. Men’s sheds and Andy’s Man Club are helping to pave the way for men to know that it is okay to talk. It takes strength and courage to open up about your struggles. The men’s shed movement and Andy’s Man Club do an amazing job in helping men to know that they can talk to someone.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

I thank Christine Grahame for securing the debate.

I am very supportive of the men’s sheds in my constituency and I want to take the time to thank Jason Schroeder, chief executive and founder of the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association. He operates the SMSA from an office in Banchory, which I am delighted to personally support—I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

Westhill and District men’s shed is also in my constituency. It was the first ever men’s shed set up in Scotland, in 2013. It now welcomes over 300 members and was voted Scottish men’s shed of the year in 2021 and received a Queen’s award for voluntary service during the pandemic.

For many, men’s sheds are a life support, providing a space for men to engage with one another and overcome challenges such as loneliness and the stigma around mental health. Sadly, since the pandemic, we have lost some sheds. That is due to post-Covid fatigue of shed trustees and financial pressures.

However, the pandemic has shown the real need for new healthy male places to socialise, with eight new shed groups requiring support in the past few months. It is disappointing, therefore, to hear that men’s sheds are not receiving proper long-term support from the Scottish Government. Despite the positive meeting that the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association had with the minister back in February, when he spoke of trilateral portfolio funding possibilities, there were no assurances of support—despite him being chased—until yesterday. Some may say that that assurance was cynically timed, to give the minister something to say in today’s debate.

The support that we are about to hear about is for just £75,000. That is for only one year and, at just 17 per cent of what was requested, it falls well short of what is required to prevent a collapse of the men’s shed movement. The minister went as far as to tell the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association to seek alternative funding next year. I have only one question for the minister: was £25,000 each really the most that he, Christina McKelvie and Kevin Stewart could spare from their budgets, and today, will he commit to supporting sheds beyond March next year?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I join colleagues in congratulating and thanking Christine Grahame for once again bringing a debate on men’s sheds to the Parliament. Like my colleagues, I welcome the shedders in the gallery and I commend everyone involved in the play, “Men Don’t Talk”.

It is testament to the positive impact that men’s sheds have on communities across Scotland that we are again debating them. I very much welcome today’s debate as an opportunity to demonstrate their positive impact on health and wellbeing, support for older people, especially but not exclusively men, and their enabling of resilient communities, as Paul Sweeney articulated.

As Maggie Chapman highlighted, the original movement started in Australia in the 1980s and was set up to improve men’s health and provide a place where men could socialise and talk shoulder to shoulder. Today, there are more than 900 sheds in Australia, with other countries adopting men’s sheds worldwide.

Here in Scotland, the movement started in 2009 and, by 2013, we had our first five sheds. Today, as members have heard, that number is more than 200. That is in no small part down to the vision of Jason Schroeder, who is the chief executive and founder of the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association. He started the men’s shed movement in Scotland in 2009 after being inspired by a talk about men’s sheds by Dr Neil Bruce, chairman of a New Zealand men’s shed.

In 2014, Jason created the SMSA and the Scottish Government became involved in 2015. Those early discussions led to Scottish Government funding of the new SMSA in 2015-16, which helped establish and grow the movement. Our support played its part in enabling Jason to become the executive officer of the SMSA in 2016 and continue the growth of an organisation that touches on every corner of Scotland, with 2,899 members and 10,627 shedders and supporters. Jason has played his highly commendable part in that growth, building the association into a team of four, with him as chief executive officer, a communications and public relations officer, a development officer and an administrator.

We have continued to back the SMSA with sustained support. Earlier this week, against the backdrop of an exceptionally challenging financial environment, I wrote to Jason with an offer of core funding for 2022-23. That said, the SMSA must be able to adapt to the demands of an ever-increasing number of sheds and help to sustain and keep existing sheds open. We are committed to helping Jason respond to those needs and to building a sustainable business model for the SMSA that can attract a wider range of funders and reduce dependency on Scottish Government support alone. For example, it could be about tapping into the upcoming social isolation and loneliness fund, which is an integral part of our programme for government commitment to invest £10 million over the next five years to tackle social isolation and loneliness across Scotland’s communities.

We recognise that men’s sheds provide more than just a physical place for activities; they enable a space for people to talk to each other. For example, in Scotland, men’s sheds have provided vital support to veterans who have missed comradeship and a sense of belonging. Challenges with mental health have touched every aspect of life in Scotland and it has never been more important to continue talking about mental wellbeing. We must use such opportunities to prevent and address mental health issues with the same commitment, passion and drive that we have in relation to physical health problems.

Many mental health problems are preventable and almost all are treatable. People can either fully recover or manage their conditions successfully and live lives that are as healthy, happy and productive as possible. The range of activities found in men’s sheds plays into that preventative health agenda. They also benefit their wider communities in a range of ways, such as through making buddy benches for schools, as we heard about, and providing classes in operating tools or craft projects. I have still to take up—as Mr O’Kane has—the offer of those particular instruction opportunities in Barrhead. Perhaps that is something that we can do together. In response to Mr O’Kane’s specific ask with regard to the community asset transfer process, I am more than happy to meet him to discuss that in more detail.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

The minister has very eloquently gone over all the benefits that sheds provide, but he has also finished talking about funding and not committed to funding beyond March next year. Will he revisit that question?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

As the member knows, we have set out broad parameters for our public spend within our revenue spending review. Specific budget decisions are taken during the budget process but, even with the RSR, there is obviously still a great deal of uncertainty about what our financial position would be.

I recognise the nature of members’ business debates and I do not want this to descend into something overly political, but the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission has already stated on the record that we are operating within the context of a 5.2 per cent real-terms reduction in our budget and that, unfortunately, means that we are challenged in how much support we can provide, however much we wish to do so. I will touch on funding matters further on in my remarks.

Considerable Scottish evidence has been gathered to support the growth of men’s sheds and it complements international research. For example, men’s sheds provide positive views of ageing and later life. Mr Sweeney talked about the importance of intergenerational solidarity and I am conscious that men’s sheds can provide that.

The evidence is referred to in the Scottish Government-funded study, “The Shed Effect”, by Age Scotland. That highlighted that 76 per cent of those surveyed agreed that their physical health improved, and 79 per cent felt that their mental health improved as a result of shed involvement. Those benefits are also felt in the wider community, with savings to our health and social care systems. SMSA research showed that, for every £1 spent on Westhill men’s shed, there was a return of £9.34 in health and social care and community learning outcomes.

Many other community projects can achieve similar positive outcomes. In response to the pandemic and in recognition of the value of grassroots wellbeing projects, last year we launched our communities mental health and wellbeing fund. Through that, we have provided £21 million to more than 1,800 local projects to deliver activities and programmes, with a further £15 million being invested this year. The fund tackles the impacts of social isolation, loneliness, and mental health inequalities on adults.

I am particularly pleased that men’s sheds across Scotland are also supported. Those include Portlethen men’s shed in Aberdeenshire, which was mentioned by Audrey Nicoll, which used funding to broaden services in response to increased numbers following the pandemic, and the Forfar men’s shed, which used funding to build a new community allotment.

The communities fund is one element of a range of work that we are doing to support positive mental health and wellbeing in Scotland. Central to that is the refresh of our mental health strategy. Alongside delivering effective services, we have an opportunity to place increasing emphasis on prevention and early intervention, and that will enable us to build on the creative projects that people, communities and services have undertaken before and during the pandemic.

I am conscious of time so, in concluding, I return to the key point that Christine Grahame made: this is the third time that men’s sheds have been debated in the chamber, and we can all welcome that. We all recognise the important role that they play. This is a debate that needs to move on from simply saying that men’s sheds are great things, and that is something we all agree on. We now need to know who will join us in support of this great initiative. Partners such as local authorities, the third sector, the national health service, the private sector and community workers alike can all play a role in developing funding and supporting the SMSA and the men’s shed movement. Let us build on what has been achieved and take men’s sheds in Scotland to the next level so that all our communities can benefit from them.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the debate and I suspend the meeting until 2 o’clock.

13:48 Meeting suspended.

14:00 On resuming—

Point of Order

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. On Tuesday this week, the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture was asked in the chamber by my colleague Oliver Mundell what the proposed date would be for the cabinet secretary’s party’s illegal “Scexit” referendum. He declined to give a specific answer, even though he knew full well that he was proposing to hold it in October 2023, as he revealed in a media interview the next day—in fact, on “Good Morning Scotland” on BBC Radio Scotland.

Presiding Officer, I have lost count of the number of times that you have asked the Scottish Government to make significant announcements to the Parliament, in the first instance, and not to the media. Despite the Minister for Parliamentary Business’s conclusion that Tuesday’s last-minute referendum announcement was not significant, it contained a very significant policy announcement. Indeed, the Scottish Government has made it its normal practice to wilfully ignore Parliament and to choose instead to run the country through media appearances and spin.

Presiding Officer, do you view that as being in order? If not, what can we do, as parliamentarians, to heighten scrutiny of a Government that does not even attempt to disguise the disrespect and disregard that it has for the Scottish Parliament?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I thank Stephen Kerr for his point of order.

It is the case that announcements on important matters should be made to the Parliament before they are released to the media. The intended date of a referendum is, of course, a matter that is of interest to Parliament.

Members will be aware that the First Minister has indicated that she will provide an update to Parliament before recess. I hope that no further information appears elsewhere before that update is provided.

Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body question time. Should any member wish to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question, or enter the letter R in the chat function.

Succinct questions and answers would be much appreciated.

Edinburgh Low Emission Zone

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

1. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, as an employer located in the zone, how it will help to meet the objectives of the Edinburgh low emission zone. (S6O-01248)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

The Edinburgh low emission zone was introduced by the City of Edinburgh Council in May 2022. Those who travel to the Parliament go through the LEZ. The objectives of the LEZ are cleaner air, healthier people and active travel options.

The Scottish Parliament has a sustainable travel plan, which encourages active travel and lower carbon emissions from commuter, business and visitor travel to the Scottish Parliament building. Walking, cycling and public transport are all encouraged, and over 80 per cent of regular building users use one of those as their main mode of transport. We provide secure bike storage and changing facilities, interest-free bike loans, including for electric bikes, and bike maintenance facilities. We have plans in place to encourage more car sharing instead of individual journeys. We are also investing in electric charging points in our car park; we have 16 currently, and have plans to increase that number.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Today is clean air day, and it is really important that the Parliament, as an institution, takes the lead on tackling the huge public health crisis that is killing thousands of people every year. I welcome what Maggie Chapman has said about the work that Parliament is doing as a cycle-friendly employer.

However, will the SPCB also look at the allowances system? Is it right that the Parliament should reimburse mileage claims for journeys that are taken within low emission zones in cars that are actually banned under the regulations that the Parliament has approved?

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

That is an interesting idea that we should consider—especially given our net zero ambitions. That is something that the corporate body and Parliament as a whole can certainly consider. We currently base reimbursement on Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs rates that are set out in legislation, so we would need to see what is possible and what changes, if any, could be made to our scheme.

I undertake, however, to raise the matter at forthcoming corporate body meetings and to consider whether we can incentivise members to shift away from using carbon-emitting vehicles, including those that would be charged under the LEZ scheme.

Members’ Expenses Scheme (Funding for Legal Services)

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body when it last reviewed the requirements for members to access legal services funded through the members’ expenses scheme in order to ascertain whether the current criteria are fit for purpose. (S6O-01249)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I begin by acknowledging that I understand the particular circumstance that Brian Whittle has been facing as an MSP, and the discussions that he has had with me and the corporate body, which remain on-going.

In general terms, the corporate body reviews the reimbursement of members’ expenses scheme in each parliamentary session to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. We last reviewed the scheme in 2019 and revisions to it were introduced at the beginning of this session. The corporate body also has a legal advice scheme for members, which is separate from the members’ expenses scheme. It was last reviewed in 2016.

Neither review highlighted any need for a change to the underlying principles or criteria for access to legal services. The operation of both schemes has demonstrated that their scope is sufficient to address the needs of a large majority of members, although we understand and accept that particular circumstances can arise in which the corporate body scheme does not meet needs. There are opportunities for members to consider one-off applications to the corporate body in those circumstances.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

As Jackson Carlaw said, he is aware of the situation that I have been facing. It has come to my attention that the current legal services provision for members is available to defend a member only if a legal action is taken against them. It does not support a member taking legal action to recover funds that have been paid to a third party through the scheme, if a dispute occurs.

That, in effect, means that in the event of, say, a landlord not returning a deposit or a contractor failing to rectify an issue with a product after it has been paid for, a member cannot, if necessary, pursue a court action to recover public funds. Does the corporate body believe that that is an acceptable situation? If not, will it agree to review the position on future provision of legal services?

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I am sympathetic, as is the corporate body, to the particular situation in which the member has found himself. We understand, however, that it is the only time that such an experience has been faced by a member. Therefore, there is not a view in the corporate body at the moment that a much wider review of the scheme is needed as a consequence.

However, as I said earlier, there is the opportunity for an exceptional application to be made to the corporate body, where that is felt to be appropriate.

Menus (Scottish Produce)

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

3. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what steps it is taking to ensure the availability of Scottish produce on the menu in the Scottish Parliament. (S6O-01214)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

The catering services at the Scottish Parliament are provided through our contract with Sodexo. We monitor the percentage of fresh Scottish produce that is used in our services, and last year approximately 60 per cent of fresh produce that was used by our services was produced in Scotland.

We invite many of our suppliers in to showcase their produce on site and to speak to members and staff directly. That is perhaps most notable during Scottish food and drink fortnight, which we participate in annually. We regularly support and organise events on site that promote Scottish produce. Last month, we held our Scotland in spring dining evening in the Holyrood room, which showcased seasonal produce such as accredited Scottish lamb and locally grown berries and asparagus.

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

How is the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body monitoring the carbon footprint, including from food miles, from its sourcing and product supply?

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

We have carbon auditing and monitoring as part of all our Scottish Parliament operations. I undertake to write to the member with more details about the specific processes for our food and drink.

Occupational Health (Chairs)

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

4. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether an assessment has been made of the chairs in the MSP block for use by members and staff, in relation to occupational health and the latest standards. (S6O-01251)

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

Our office furniture contracts require suppliers to ensure that chairs meet all relevant standards in force at the time of purchase. We inspect chairs at regular intervals to ensure that they remain in safe condition and replace them when they reach end of life. If a member or member of staff feels that they require support for a particular health concern, they can contact the people and culture office—formerly human resources—for support. If necessary, a workplace assessment can be arranged with our occupational health provider.

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

Could we seek a further update as to the date of purchase, as I am sure that Christine Grahame will appreciate that human factors and ergonomics engineering is an ever-changing and evolving discipline?

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

I do not have the date of purchase to hand and I do not even know whether the chairs were all purchased at the same time, but I will endeavour to find that out and to advise the member in writing. Chairs are replaced if they do not pass an inspection, which is in line with our environmental policy.

Crèche (Reopening)

Natalie Don (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

5. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will provide an update on the reopening of the Scottish Parliament crèche. (S6O-01247)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

In March of this year, the SPCB agreed to procure a new provider to re-establish and run the on-site crèche facility here at Holyrood. The decision was taken in order to maintain our commitment to accessibility by continuing to provide childcare for visitors and passholders to the building who have young children.

Officials have completed all the procurement requirements and they are ready to go out to market later this month. The SPCB expects to award the contract in October 2022. In line with Care Inspectorate guidance, we have allowed for a six-month mobilisation period and intend the new service to open in spring 2023.

Natalie Don (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

As the corporate body is aware, the provision of a high-quality crèche service allows MSPs, parliamentary staff and visitors to have the childcare facilities that they require to perform their duties.

As we return from a long period of hybrid working, we need to ensure that staff and members are supported fully with that transition. I am a new member and a mother to young children, and the crèche has not been in use since I was elected more than 12 months ago. What efforts have been made to prioritise the reimplementation of the service?

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

The SPCB has had detailed conversations about this issue. One of the challenges that we had was that the crèche service was ceased because of lockdown and the closure of Parliament at the start of the pandemic. Changes to Care Inspectorate guidance mean that we have had to change how the crèche operates, which is why we have needed to retender. I understand and appreciate the difficulties that the situation has caused for the member and perhaps other members in the past year.

We hope to have a contract approved in October this year and the crèche up and running by spring next year.

Parliamentary Functions (Applications)

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it has explored the possibility of creating apps for parliamentary functions. (S6O-01250)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Parliament already provides a few mobile-friendly applications and services to support members in their roles and to support parliamentary business. Examples of those services include the questions and motions mobile application, which allows members to raise questions and to raise and support motions at any time and from any location on any device with a browser and an internet connection.

In addition, the digital voting application was developed and delivered, along with other aspects of the hybrid Parliament, in response to the pandemic to ensure that members could continue to participate in parliamentary business, using mobile devices from wherever they had internet access.

Officials are in the early stages of work to understand how we can improve the digital delivery of information and services to members, and input from members has been, and will continue to be, sought to ensure that that work is a success.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am talking about actual apps.

According to my staff, I am supposed to put money in a jar whenever I mention Westminster—there is quite a lot of money in that jar, I can tell you. Down south, there are excellent standalone apps—actual apps—which enhance the functions of Parliament. We at the Scottish Parliament should have that too. Business papers, Scottish Parliament information centre briefings, broadcast footage, questions, motions, voting records and even division bell push notifications could be included as features in such a set of apps. Sadly, our current reliance on web apps or email notifications is outdated. They are simply not as effective as standalone apps.

Does the SPCB accept that moves in that direction would make Parliament more accessible for Holyrood staff and, more importantly, the voters who keep us here, and is it open to looking into the proposal further?

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

We are more than open to input from members and others as we start to consider exactly what information members need to carry out their business and what information should be available, and in what forms, to members of the public.

Traditionally, we have produced apps that can run on any device, rather than specific apps for Apple and Android devices. There are significant cost-saving reasons for that. Being able to run applications off a web-based platform means that we do not need to maintain relationships with individual app providers, and tendering of those individual apps can be expensive—it is much more costly than tendering for a web-based version. However, we will take on board the member’s comments and include them in our conversations about how we further develop the support that we provide.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body questions. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business.

Constitution, External Affairs and Culture

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is portfolio question time, on constitution, external affairs and culture.

Historic Environment Scotland Assets (Cowdenbeath)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with Historic Environment Scotland about the reopening of assets in the Cowdenbeath constituency. (S6O-01231)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I note Annabelle Ewing’s swift transition, Presiding Officer.

I have regular discussions with Historic Environment Scotland about the health and safety challenges of Scotland’s properties in care. As regards the Cowdenbeath constituency, I understand that the main castle area of Aberdour castle will remain fenced until a tactile inspection has been completed. However, Historic Environment Scotland aims to have some areas at the site reopened to the public as soon as possible. Historic Environment Scotland would be more than happy to offer Annabelle Ewing a site visit to learn at first hand from its experts about the situation there.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I thank the minister for that helpful answer. In fact, it is not just parts of Aberdour castle that are closed to the public and have been so since the start of the pandemic but Inchcolm abbey and St Bridget’s kirk in Dalgety Bay. Obviously, that is impacting negatively on the local economy. Although I would, of course, like to take up the opportunity to meet Historic Environment Scotland. I also ask the minister to use his good offices to ensure that all three sites are opened as soon as possible and to provide a bit of clarity to what “as soon as possible” might mean.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I congratulate Annabelle Ewing on the way in which she is, quite rightly, advocating on behalf of her constituents and her constituency—I would expect nothing less of her.

I recognise the impact on local businesses and communities of access restrictions on historic sites, which Annabelle Ewing has rightly outlined, and I absolutely share the frustrations of members and our constituents regarding continued closures. As I am sure that we all accept, the safety of visitors and HES staff must take priority, and I will pass the member’s specific concerns, including those about community engagement, to Historic Environment Scotland.

HES is working hard to prioritise sites effectively in the inspection schedule and to keep public access in place where it is safe to do so. I am pleased to see that some sites, such as, this week, Doune castle, have now partially opened, but I recognise that there is further to go in the member’s constituency.

Scottish Government Overseas Offices

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the work of its overseas offices. (S6O-01232)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Scotland’s international network creates domestic opportunities, attracts investment and ultimately benefits the people of Scotland. I am pleased to see, in the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee’s recent report on the Scottish Government’s international work, cross-party enthusiasm for the excellent job that Scotland’s international offices do day to day. Building on my response to the committee’s report on 6 June, I will follow up with the committee in the coming weeks in greater detail on the work that our international offices are currently doing and what they will be focused on in the months ahead.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

Although I recognise that the Scottish Government’s overseas offices perform a function in seeking to promote Scottish businesses and culture abroad, the fact is that the Scottish National Party Government appears to be misusing that resource to pursue a foreign policy that is distinct from the rest of the United Kingdom’s and discuss independence with foreign Governments, all at taxpayers’ expense. Will the cabinet secretary confirm whether he has met foreign Governments to discuss independence and, if so, on how many occasions he has done that?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Alexander Burnett would benefit from visiting some of the offices. I do not know whether he has been to any or spoken to any of the staff in them and satisfied himself about what they have been doing. They are highly professional representatives of Scotland. They benefit the economy of Scotland on inward investment, and they promote the culture of Scotland and Scotland’s relations with the rest of the world. They do a tremendous job.

If I as cabinet secretary or other ministers of the Scottish Government hold conversations with others, of course we discuss the Government’s policy. That is what we have been elected to do. The member should not seek to undermine the professionalism and effectiveness of Scottish Government offices around the world. It really is not worthy of him.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The latest Ernst & Young attractiveness survey Scotland showed Scotland leading the way in the UK when it comes to securing foreign direct investment in spite of the significant challenges posed by Brexit and the pandemic. Given the findings of the report, can the cabinet secretary provide any further information about the work that the Government’s international offices are undertaking to attract investment to Scotland?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I thank Paul McLennan for that sensible question. The EY results are fantastic for Scotland and underline the strength of our inward investment offer, with the growth in Scotland’s FDI performance outpacing that of Europe and the rest of the UK.

Scotland has maintained its position as the UK’s most attractive FDI location outside London for nine of the past 11 years and for the seventh year running. The Scottish Government and its delivery partners, Scottish Development International and Scottish Enterprise, will continue to focus support on attracting the high-quality inward investment required to deliver our ambitions in policy areas such as energy transition, focusing on ScotWind, hydrogen and the decarbonisation of transport. Scotland’s international network is vital in supporting that work. The Scottish Government will continue to promote and showcase our world-leading capabilities on the international stage at events such as the Dubai expo, the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—and the world forum for FDI.

Census 2022

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on Scotland’s census 2022. (S6O-01233)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Following the end of the census collection period, National Records of Scotland is now focused on planned post-collection quality control and assurance work, which includes the census coverage survey, the second-largest social research exercise in Scotland after the census itself. NRS is confident that the national return rate and coverage across the country, coupled with the aforementioned post-collection quality control and assurance work, will provide a credible, high-quality census output. The agency is working with a number of statisticians and global experts in census and administrative data to help to steer its statistical and methodological work over the next few months.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I sincerely thank the cabinet secretary, who is a very important MSP indeed, for providing a humble member such as me with that answer.

With trains, ferries, Rangers prosecutions, trams, Prestwick, Burntisland Fabrications, national health service disasters, policing scandals and now the Scottish National Party’s shambolic census, hard-working Scots always end up footing the bill for the SNP’s world-beating incompetence. Will the cabinet secretary tell them whether he or anyone else will pay the price for the £30 million census debacle?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The member must forgive me, but I am not sure which question he was talking to in his peroration.

The increase in census costs to raise the return rate from the 70s to 88 per cent constituted 4 per cent of the budget for the census round. Frankly, that is—relatively speaking—an affordable and reasonable amount to spend on raising the census return rate to provide what the experts have described as a “solid foundation”.

Given that all public services rely on a census return rate that provides such a solid foundation, we should all take the opportunity to thank the 2.3 million households that took part in the census and the great many people who worked on it, including those who worked as enumerators, of whom there were more than 1,000, particularly in the last month, to ensure our securing of a “solid foundation”, which independent international experts have described the census as being.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Although some of the rhetoric in the chamber will draw attention away from this fact, it is important to acknowledge, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, that 2.3 million households returned the census. That is an enormous proportion of the population. The data that has been collected from that immense exercise will deliver real and tangible advances in the delivery of local public services.

Can the cabinet secretary put on record some examples of how census data directly translates into inclusive service planning for Scotland’s communities?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The census remains the best way to gather vital information that Government, councils, the national health service and a range of users in the public, private and third sectors need. The results help local authorities, businesses and Government to plan a wide range of vital public services to improve the lives of people who live and work in Scotland.

The information that has been collected from the census helps us to understand who stays in Scotland, who they stay with and what sort of accommodation they stay in, which allows decisions to be made about where money should be spent in local communities on things such as schools where our children are educated, roads that we drive on every day and healthcare that we rely on. The census is a very important piece of work, and I am delighted that it has reached the return rate that it has, given the challenges that were faced through the census collection period.

Independence (Currency)

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what its policy is for the currency of an independent Scotland. (S6O-01234)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Scotland will continue to use the pound sterling at the point of independence, establishing an independent Scottish currency as soon as is practicably possible through a careful, managed and responsible transition when an independent Scottish Parliament chooses to do so.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I, too, am honoured that the minister has felt able to answer my question.

In 2014, the policy of the Scottish National Party was a monetary union. Now, Ian Blackford wants sterlingisation, but the SNP conference rejected the leadership’s position, describing it as a “dangerous experiment”. Coalition partner Lorna Slater said that it would be “catastrophic”. Patrick Harvie said that it would prevent Scotland from joining the European Union. Alex Salmond wants a Scottish pound. Alyn Smith wants the euro. The independence movement is like two bald bankers fighting over a 50p. If they cannot agree on the currency, why on earth should the public?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

There is literally no answer that I could give to Willie Rennie that would satisfy him. We are on different sides of the independence debate.

If we cannot agree on that, it would, at least, be nice for us to be able to agree, as democrats, that the issue is one on which the people should be able to decide.

United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is, regarding the potential impact on Scotland, on the upcoming first meeting of states parties to the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Vienna. (S6O-01235)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government is on record supporting the principles of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and has welcomed countries such as Ireland ratifying the treaty.

However, Scotland will not be able to share its views and support like-minded partners at the first meeting of the states parties to the treaty in Vienna later this month, which is due to be opened by the United Nations secretary general. Scotland is not a sovereign independent country—yet. The United Kingdom Government’s opposition to the treaty means that it has chosen not to attend as an observer. Only with independence can Scotland’s interests be properly represented on the international stage.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

It is long established that an independent Scotland will be free of nuclear weapons on the basis that such indiscriminate weapons of mass destruction and mass murder are morally abhorrent and should in no circumstances be used.

Despite the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons having made the use and stockpiling of such weapons illegal, the UK Government, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, is not engaging in next week’s first meeting of states parties in Vienna. I will be attending, as part of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons’ parliamentarians for the TPNW delegation, thereby ensuring that a Scottish voice and our position on this consequential matter can be heard.

Will the cabinet secretary advise how quickly Scotland will sign up to the TPNW in the event of its becoming an independent country?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I share my colleague’s disappointment that the UK Government is not engaging with this important process. I understand that a number of countries that are not parties to the treaty, including NATO member states, will be attending as observers. I welcome that commitment to multilateralism and a willingness to engage on these crucial issues. I am also glad to hear that the member will join a delegation of parliamentarians in Vienna.

As the First Minister and I have said this week, the Scottish Government will be publishing further papers setting out the prospectus for independence, which will include our position on treaties.

Local Culture (Economic Contribution)

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

6. To ask the Scottish Government what contribution local culture, evidenced in museums such as the Trimontium Museum in Melrose and the National Mining Museum Scotland in Newtongrange, makes to the local and wider Scottish economy. (S6O-01236)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The Trimontium Museum and the National Mining Museum are fine examples of how the cultural sector can contribute to both the local and wider economies.

I recently attended the official opening of the refurbished Trimontium Museum and viewed its fine collection of items from the Roman period and the iron age. I was also able to thank the trustees for their incredible work there. I look forward to visiting the National Mining Museum, which is home to around 95,000 items of national significance and which attracts 48,000 visitors each year and generates £1.3 million for the local economy.

The Scottish Government continues to provide core funding to Museums Galleries Scotland, which supports 430 museums and galleries across Scotland.

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

Very small communities such as that in Tweedsmuir, which is high in the Borders hills, can make a huge difference to the regeneration of their areas. Is the minister aware of the regeneration of the Crook Inn, which closed in 2006 after more than 400 years of continuous operation? The work is being done in phases, the first of which is the establishment of the Wee Crook, a licensed bistro, which will certainly boost the local economy. Will he accept my invitation to see the project for himself—not necessarily to go to the licensed bit, but just to visit the project?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I am never spared the fun with Christine Grahame. In response to a previous question from her, I took up her invitation to go to Trimontium. I was grateful to accept her hospitality and to go along to the reopening with her on that special occasion. I agree that historic properties such as the Crook Inn in Tweedsmuir are really important to local heritage and a community’s sense of place. If Christine Grahame would like to write to me with further details, I will be more than happy to consider her very generous invitation. I look forward to learning more about the restoration of that historic building and the tremendous work that has been undertaken by the local community.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Christine Grahame makes a good point, but, all too often, spending on culture is the first thing that councils cut when funds are tight. For example, in Midlothian, which is in Christine Grahame’s constituency, the Scottish National Party-run council has cut the funding for museums and galleries from £83,000 in 2016-17 to £10,000 in 2020-21. It is the same story in other SNP council areas, such as East Ayrshire and Glasgow. How does the minister expect our culture sector to grow locally when SNP councils are slashing spending on culture across Scotland?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

With

reference to the Trimontium Museum in Melrose and the

National Mining Museum in Newtongrange, I have regular conversations with local authority culture conveners. I hope to see them again when they are reappointed in order that we can take a partnership approach to ensuring that our culture offering is strong and that we are able to work together to achieve our shared priority of people being able to enjoy our cultural facilities not only for the wellbeing of those communities, but for our own personal wellbeing as we recover from the pandemic.

European Countries (Relationships)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what priority it attaches to developing relationships with other European countries. (S6O-01237)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government attaches a high priority to developing relationships with other European

countries, which is why we want to rejoin the European Union. That will be made possible only by Scotland becoming an independent country.

Our recently published “Scotland’s Global Affairs Framework” sets out the values and principles that underpin the Scottish Government’s international work and the basis on which the Scottish Government will prioritise its European and wider international activity.

The Scottish Government will continue to take a positive and proactive role in engaging with European partners on shared challenges and opportunities where Scotland is well placed to offer expertise and share best practice.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The Erasmus programme is a fantastic initiative that allowed us to forge relationships with our European friends and opened the world for Scottish universities and Scottish students. It was a needless casualty of Brexit. However, the Welsh Government has already committed £65 million to its scheme, with young people from Wales preparing to go abroad from September. Assuming that he believes that I have a sufficient electoral mandate, I ask the cabinet secretary to confirm whether the Scottish scheme will be up and running for the next academic year or whether thousands of young Scots will continue to miss out on the opportunity of a lifetime.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I thank Liam McArthur for that follow-up question. As I have indicated in answer to his colleague from North East Fife, the loss of the Erasmus programme is, indeed, a tragedy. Its replacement has been a matter of discussion between the Scottish Government and the European Commission, and we will continue to make progress on that. I hope—and I think—that we all agree that we need to do everything that we can to ensure that young people from Scotland and young people from the European continent are able to continue in the educational exchange that existed while we were part of the European Union.

That might give Liam McArthur cause to consider that the best future for Scotland is in re-establishing all the programmes that were established with the European Union, and the only way of doing that is by rejoining the European Union. I would be delighted to welcome him if he were to join that campaign.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

One of the best ways to develop relationships with European countries is through educational ties. When my colleagues have asked the Scottish Government recently about delays to the replacement for Erasmus, they have instead been told about the plan for Scotland to rejoin the EU. While the Scottish Government waits for that theoretical solution, thousands of very real students are missing out on educational opportunities in Europe. The Scottish Government is limiting the opportunities of a generation with its gamble on future EU membership, which it cannot guarantee.

Why will the Scottish Government not follow the example of the Welsh Labour Government and bring forward a replacement for Erasmus now?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I think that it was only this week that we had confirmation from the British Labour Party that it is not going to seek membership of the European Union for the United Kingdom. That disappoints a great

many people, perhaps including some of Foysol Choudhury’s colleagues—and perhaps even him.

I have already given an answer to his Liberal Democrat colleague in relation to the Erasmus scheme, in particular.

Foysol Choudhury talked about Scotland rejoining the European Union and “theoretical” opportunities. I say to him that this is not a theoretical opportunity. If one is a member state of the European Union, one can with great ease play a full part in the Erasmus programme. Perhaps he is one of those on the Labour benches who actually represent the 30 per cent of Labour voters who are in favour of Scottish independence, and he can join us in the campaign when the referendum is under way.

Independence Referendum (Legal Advice)

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

8. To ask the Scottish Government whether it has now published all the legal advice it has received in relation to a second independence referendum. (S6O-01238)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

We have

released the legal advice required under the commissioner’s decision, as it does not merit the time and expense required for an appeal. Although we disagree with the decision, we have published precisely what the commissioner specified. In line with the ministerial code, I do not intend to comment on the content of other legal advice.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am kind of grateful for that reply, but the Scottish Information Commissioner’s ruling

about this could not have been clearer. In it, he states:

“a second independence referendum in Scotland is of significant public interest for a substantial portion of the Scottish population.”

He goes on to say that the request to release the information

“should be considered one of the exceptional circumstances which outweighs the in-built public interest in maintaining the exemption”

on confidentiality. However, he was not talking about the legal advice as to whether the Government could road test a question with the Electoral Commission; he was talking about the central legality around the propositions that are open to the Scottish Government in pursuing its objective of holding an independence referendum next year. Does the cabinet secretary not realise that, by withholding the legal advice on that central legality, he is holding not only the Scottish Information Commissioner but this Parliament in contempt?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

As I have already made clear, in line with the ministerial code,

I do not intend to comment on the content of other legal advice. Incidentally, that position has been held by Liberal Democrat ministers in this Parliament and by Liberal Democrat ministers at Westminster. I have no plans to depart from that position today.

Role of Incineration in Waste Hierarchy

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a statement by Lorna Slater on the role of incineration in the waste hierarchy. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Finding better ways to manage the waste that our society is creating, and ways to reduce its total amount, are a key part of moving towards our vision for Scotland’s circular economy and of tackling the twin climate and biodiversity crises. Delivering that vision requires radical action over the next decade. This is an exciting time, as we accelerate our move towards a zero-waste circular economy in Scotland.

In November, I set out a range of actions that we would take in the short term, including introducing a circular economy bill, delivering Scotland’s deposit return scheme and undertaking a review of the role of incineration in Scotland’s waste hierarchy. I am pleased to say that the complementary consultations on proposals for a route map to deliver a circular economy in Scotland and on proposals for legislation in a circular economy bill have now been published. I hope that all members will take the opportunity to feed into those consultations and encourage their constituents to do the same.

Our primary focus is on preventing material and products from becoming waste, through recycling and processing. However, it is equally critical that we correctly manage the unavoidable and unrecyclable waste that we produce, as we move to a circular economy.

Scotland’s progress in reducing emissions in the waste and resources sector over the past 20 years has been striking. In 2019, waste and resources sector emissions were more than 30 per cent lower than in 2011, and 73 per cent lower than in 1998. Together, we have taken significant strides in reducing the amount of residual waste that we produce, through efforts to tackle our throwaway culture and promote recycling. However, Scotland still produces around 4.5 million tonnes of residual waste—black bag waste that typically goes to landfill or incineration.

Policies such as the Scottish landfill tax and the forthcoming ban on the landfilling of biodegradable municipal waste have been successful in diverting waste away from landfill and encouraging action further up the waste hierarchy. Indeed, in 2020, Scotland exceeded the European Union target for diverting biodegradable municipal waste from landfill. However, we are not reusing or recycling as much of that material as we would like and, recently, there has been an increase in the amount of household waste that has been incinerated, which has closely matched the reduction in such waste going to landfill.

We can and must do better. Around 60 per cent of residual waste in our black bags from homes and businesses around Scotland consists of recyclable materials. Our on-going policies and the additional measures that are proposed in our consultations will make it easier for householders to recycle the right materials, and will reduce the numbers of unrecyclable products on the market, which will drive down the amount of residual waste that we produce.

However, it is important to recognise that, as we transition to a circular economy, we will still produce residual waste that needs to be managed in a way that minimises environmental impact without hindering our progress towards a circular economy. That is why, in November last year, I appointed Dr Colin Church to lead an independent review of the role of incineration in the waste hierarchy. I am grateful to Dr Church for undertaking that review, and to all those who took the time to provide evidence and engage in conversations with him during its course.

Dr Church set the detailed scope for the review within agreed parameters, which included a prioritisation of the national capacity requirements for municipal residual waste; consideration of the societal impacts of residual waste treatment, including health and community impacts; and consideration of how emissions from existing infrastructure could be reduced.

Members will be aware that on 10 May we published Dr Church’s report, which sets out some valuable findings and recommendations. I hope that members agree that the scope and approach that Dr Church adopted has provided a robust report that provides a solid evidence base to inform discussions and decisions on how we manage municipal residual waste in a way that minimises environmental impacts.

The review makes 12 recommendations that are based on key findings around capacity, the strategic planning of waste infrastructure, data and community engagement. We support and will take action to deliver all of Dr Church’s recommendations for the Scottish Government. Many of the recommendations are also relevant for local authorities and the wider waste industry. I encourage local authorities and industry to consider what actions they will take and how they could work with us to respond to relevant recommendations.

The review also makes two provisional recommendations on decarbonisation, pending the completion of further detailed analysis of options to decarbonise existing residual waste infrastructure. That work has been commissioned and is expected to be delivered by the end of the year. I am pleased that Dr Church has agreed to remain in his role as independent chair, and I understand that he is planning to hold additional stakeholder engagement sessions for that work. I am sure that he will shortly let stakeholders know how they can get involved.

We have published our response to the 12 full recommendations and I will provide a summary of some of the key areas today. Although it is clear from the report that incineration has a role to play in managing, in a sanitary way, unavoidable and unrecyclable waste, the review rightly recognises that the only way to stop any negative environmental impacts from residual waste is to prevent that waste from arising in the first place.

Our draft route map sets out proposals to minimise the amount of residual waste that we produce, move to a circular economy and greatly reduce the need for incineration in Scotland. In relation to the incineration capacity that we need in Scotland, Dr Church found that although there is likely to be a temporary undercapacity of residual waste treatment in Scotland in 2025, when the ban on landfilling biodegradable municipal waste comes into force, Scotland faces the real risk of overcapacity by 2027 if all the incineration plants that have planning permission are built to schedule. Based on those findings, the review recommends that no further planning permission is granted to incineration infrastructure within the scope of the review—that is, incinerators that treat municipal waste—with some exceptions.

We accept that the risk of overcapacity is real and unpalatable, and that further action is required. That is why we will work within existing statutory frameworks to set out clearly that the Scottish Government does not support the development of further municipal waste incineration capacity in Scotland, with very limited exceptions. New national planning policy will be introduced through national planning framework 4, which will be presented to the Scottish Parliament for approval later this year.

In addition, the notification direction, requiring local authorities to alert ministers to planning applications for new incineration facilities and notify ministers if they are minded to grant planning permission for incineration facilities, will remain in place. There will of course be some very limited exceptions to that. The review highlights the challenges that rural and island communities face in dealing with their residual waste. We will continue to support all local authorities in making the most appropriate provisions for the landfill ban.

The review also recommends that the Scottish Government takes a more strategic approach to planning and deploying waste management facilities, and as part of that, develops a cap to indicate the residual waste treatment capacity that is required in Scotland. We will identify options to develop such a cap as part of a residual waste plan, which we will publish by 2024. It is imperative for planning decisions that the cap is robust, and the review noted challenges around data, recommending that the Scottish Government develops better waste management data, and improves its capacity to model future trends.

In response, we will build upon on-going work, including implementing a digital waste tracking service, and on-going and proposed compositional analyses by undertaking a feasibility study on modelling options to forecast future trends and develop an indicative cap.

I was disappointed to read the review’s finding that communities do not always receive the authentic and committed engagement from local authorities and industry that they deserve. That is unacceptable. We will achieve our vision for a circular economy only by involving everyone in important conversations, particularly on waste management. In line with the review’s recommendations, we will work with community groups and local authorities to facilitate the co-production of guidelines for effective community engagement by the end of 2023.

Our published response sets out in further detail additional actions that we intend to take to address the issues and recommendations that are set out in Dr Church’s report. I intend to incorporate as many of those actions as possible into our final waste route map, taking account of any feedback that is provided through the on-going consultation.

I look forward to working with colleagues in the chamber and all stakeholders to develop and deliver our route map and circular economy bill and, together, accelerating our move towards a zero-waste circular economy in Scotland.

The Presiding Officer

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

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement, and I thank Dr Church for carrying out his review.

Incineration should be a last resort, but the minister confirmed in her statement that it is business as usual for burning waste. There is a missed opportunity, and the minister has done the bare minimum on incineration by declining new planning permissions but being happy for the massive overcapacity that is already approved to go ahead. I warned the Government as far back as 2017, and even its own advisers at Zero Waste Scotland issued a warning, but the Government did not heed the warnings then, and it is not heeding them now. Instead, it is risking Scotland becoming the ashtray of Europe.

The Scottish National Party and the Greens now face the prospect of using taxpayer funds to buy out local authority contracts, or even of importing waste to feed the overcapacity. Not content with Scotland being the ashtray of Europe, the SNP could turn us into the dump of Europe, too.

We know that the minister accepts those arguments because, in her manifesto, she promised to

“Oppose the construction of new incinerators as they alleviate the pressure to reduce waste, cause air pollution and are bad for the climate.”

Can the minister explain why she has abandoned that promise and is content to allow the huge capacity that is already in the planning system to go ahead?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I feel that Maurice Golden has not understood what is being announced today. Last year, the Scottish Greens made a manifesto commitment to oppose the construction of new incinerators, and we have delivered on that—and more. As I have set out, we are fully implementing the recommendations of the independent review that I commissioned, which includes there being no further planning permission granted for incineration facilities, and the setting of an indicative cap. We will develop an indicative cap to support future planning and investment decisions, following the improvement in data.

The notification direction will remain in place. That means that local authorities will not be able to grant consent unless ministers have cleared them to do that.

Maurice Golden might recall that a similar notification direction was used previously, and successfully, to give the effect of a moratorium on unconventional oil and gas extraction.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement.

Although Labour welcomes Dr Church’s report and recommendations as far as they go, it should not have taken a review to tell the minister to implement her own manifesto commitments. That dithering has delayed further meaningful action.

The minister said that we will not see new national planning policy on incineration until NPF4 is presented to Parliament for approval later this year. Does she have confidence that the existing notification direction on planning permission for new incinerators is effective enough, given the fact that a new plant to burn waste plastics has been approved in West Dunbartonshire since publication of the review?

On Scotland’s appalling record on recycling, we saw the amount of waste that was being incinerated in the country increase, shockingly, by over 200 per cent between 2011 and 2020. Incineration of household waste increased by nearly 300 per cent.

Dr Church highlights that we will, from 2027, have overcapacity for incineration, even with a ban on planning permission for new plants, because existing plants for which permission has been granted will still be built. Slowing new capacity is one thing, but what will the minister do to reduce overcapacity?

Even though the report on the full environmental implications of existing incinerators has not yet been published, we know that our current incinerators are some of Scotland’s biggest polluters and need to be phased out sooner rather than later. That will not happen simply by banning the building of new incinerators.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

We have launched a consultation into the development of a route map, which sets out our proposal to reduce residual waste. That is a position that we all want to get to. In order to manage the potential risk of overcapacity in the system, we will work within existing statutory and other frameworks that set out clearly that the Scottish Government does not, with very limited exceptions, support development of more municipal waste incineration capacity.

The notification direction, which will remain in place, requires planning authorities to alert Scottish ministers about new planning applications for

incineration facilities, and to notify ministers if they are minded to grant planning permission for those facilities. I am sure that the member would agree with me that the best way to reduce the side effects and negative effects of dealing with residual waste is to ensure that we have the minimum amount of residual waste in the first place.