Scottish Parliament, 29 June 2022

312 contributions from 71 members. The official report.

Point of Order

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The first item of business will be portfolio questions and the first portfolio is Covid-19 recovery and parliamentary business.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I make this point of order further to the one that Stephen Kerr made last night and in the light of the response from the Minister for Parliamentary Business in relation to the potential appearance by the Lord Advocate to answer questions on the referral of an independence referendum bill to the Supreme Court, which was announced yesterday by the First Minister.

As you will recall, the First Minister stated that she believes that the Lord Advocate would be willing to answer questions from MSPs. In response to Stephen Kerr’s point of order, the Minister for Parliamentary Business stated:

“Members know that the sub judice ... rule is recognised by rule 7.5 of standing orders by reference to the Contempt of Court Act 1981. That rule properly prohibits parliamentary debate of matters that are currently before the courts. Its purpose is to help to maintain the boundaries of the relationship between the legislature and the judiciary, and it should be respected on that basis.

The 1981 act is concerned with hearings and does not spell out when proceedings are active specifically for references like the one made today.”—[

Official Report

, 28 June 2022; c 213.]

With the greatest of respect to the minister, whom I see on the front bench, I would take issue with that. As he said, correctly, rule 7.5 of our standing orders contains the rule on sub judice. That states:

“A member may not in the proceedings of the Parliament refer to any matter in relation to which legal proceedings are active”—

that is correct. Secondly, it states:

“legal proceedings are active ... if they are active for the purposes of section 2 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981”.

Section 2 of the 1981 act refers to schedule 1 to the act, which refers to a number of different types of proceedings: criminal proceedings to civil proceedings, at both first instance and appeal.

Although there is no reference to a referral of a devolution issue, that is caught by paragraph 12 of schedule 1, which is a catch-all provision that catches the referral by the Lord Advocate. It says:

“Proceedings other than criminal proceedings and appellate proceedings are active from the time when arrangements for the hearing are made or, if no such arrangements are previously made, from the time the hearing begins, until the proceedings are disposed of or discontinued or withdrawn”.

In relation to the referral by the Lord Advocate that was announced yesterday, no such arrangements for a hearing have so far been made, thus the Lord Advocate’s referral cannot be said to be active proceedings either in law or for the purposes of our standing orders. Therefore, there is nothing to prevent the Lord Advocate from coming to this chamber to take questions from MSPs. That is in accordance with the wider position in Scots law.

For those reasons, I reiterate the calls for the Lord Advocate to appear tomorrow in the chamber, before the recess. This is urgent. Of course, if we wait until after the recess, the hearing might well have been arranged and the sub judice rule might well apply. This is the Parliament’s one and only opportunity. In the interests of transparency and openness, and given the proper role of this Parliament in scrutinising this Government, and given the very significant national issues that have been raised, I ask you to reconsider, on behalf of the Presiding Officer and the Parliamentary Bureau, especially in the light of what the First Minister said, which was that she thought that the Lord Advocate would be amenable.

I apologise for going on at some length, Presiding Officer, but, as a lawyer, you will know how important it is to outline the provisions.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I thank the member for his point of order. Standing orders provide that matters in relation to active legal proceedings can be referred to only to the extent that is permitted by the Presiding Officer.

In relation to the reference to the Supreme Court, my understanding is that the case is not currently active and that, therefore, the sub judice rule is not currently engaged. Once a date for a hearing is set, the expectation is that the rule will be engaged. At present, there is no indication of when a hearing will be set. At that time, it will, of course, be a matter for the Presiding Officer to apply the rule in the normal way.

Any statement by the Lord Advocate would, of course, be a matter for the Parliamentary Bureau in the first instance.

Covid-19 Recovery and Parliamentary Business

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

We now come to portfolio questions. If a member wishes 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. As ever, to get in as many members as possible, I would appreciate succinct questions and answers.

Covid-19 Recovery (Staff Shortages)

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

1. To ask the Scottish Government how its Covid-19 recovery policies across Government are helping to address any Covid-19-related staff shortages across Scottish public sector bodies, including in Aberdeen Donside. (S6O-01284)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As part of the Government’s measures to assist public bodies in addressing the issue of Covid-19-related staff shortages in Aberdeen Donside, in 2022-23 Aberdeen City Council will receive £409.8 million to fund vital day-to-day local services, which equates to an extra £35.2 million—an additional 9.4 per cent—compared with 2021-22.

Councils and other public sector bodies have flexibility to manage their resources and budgets as long as they fulfil their statutory obligations and address jointly agreed national and local priorities. The Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities have agreed shared priorities for recovery, which involve targeting support to those people who have been most affected during the pandemic.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I welcome the fact that NHS Grampian has changed its approach to recruitment to strengthen participation in international recruitment initiatives and to promote links with further education and apprenticeship programmes. I also welcome the fact that it is undertaking a review of all agency staff, as well as providing mentoring roles to older staff.

Will the Deputy First Minister join me in welcoming NHS Grampian’s outward-looking approach? How is the Government further enhancing efforts across the public sector?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I welcome the steps that NHS Grampian is taking, which are part of the work that is being undertaken in the national health service to expand the recruitment of staff and to exhaust all options to address the shortages issue.

Obviously, there are challenges with international recruitment, which have been exacerbated by the issues around Brexit and immigration, but the Scottish Government will work with health boards to encourage them to take the steps that NHS Grampian has taken.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that, this week, a circular was issued by the Scottish Government that removed the temporary Covid protections from NHS employees. I have been contacted by NHS employees with long Covid who are worried about what that means for their jobs. They do not have access to proper diagnostics and treatment although long Covid is incredibly debilitating, and they are concerned that they will lose pay and lose their jobs.

Will the cabinet secretary review the policy urgently and reassure staff with long Covid that they will still have jobs to return to?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is absolutely committed to the fair work agenda, and the issues that Jackie Baillie raises are ones that would be addressed by that agenda.

Individuals who face challenges with their health are entitled to support from their employers as part of that activity. I reassure members of staff that that is the case.

If Jackie Baillie is concerned about particular instances that have been drawn to her attention, I would be grateful if she would share those with ministers. We will certainly explore any anxiety that is in the minds of staff as a consequence of the guidance to which she referred.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Following on from Jackie Dunbar’s question about the NHS, I am very concerned about the current state of primary care. Poor workforce planning means that Scotland is about 225 whole-time equivalent general practitioners short. According to Audit Scotland, little progress had been made on recruiting more GPs even before the pandemic hit, with only 39 having been recruited in three years.

Can the cabinet secretary tell us what is being done about the recruitment of GPs to ensure that we can deal with the current crisis?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I acknowledge that, in some parts of the country, there are particular challenges around the recruitment of general practitioners. Without generalising too much, I would say that the issue looks to be more acute in rural areas than it is in urban areas, although urban areas are not without their challenges.

The Government has invested heavily in the recruitment of general practitioners and has worked to make general practice attractive through a number of different interventions, such as reducing the financial burdens that some general practitioners have, in the past, been expected to carry and enabling them to be better supported by NHS infrastructure. Scotland has more GPs per head of population than there are in other parts of the United Kingdom, but we must continue to work to recruit general practitioners, which is a priority of the health secretary as we speak.

Covid-19 Recovery Planning (Access to Interpreters and Translators)

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether its Covid-19 recovery planning will include measures to improve access to interpreters and translators for people using public services. (S6O-01285)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Covid recovery strategy is focused on bringing about a fairer future, particularly for those who are most affected by the pandemic. We will do that by transforming public services to ensure that they are person centred in design and delivery and that they support communities and the most vulnerable to thrive.

As part of that transformation, the Scottish Government is committed to improving and embedding inclusive communication within Government and across public bodies, and it is currently reviewing the effectiveness of the public sector equality duty in Scotland. Analysis of consultation responses on proposals that are designed to support public bodies to better meet PSED and the Scottish specific duties requirements is expected to be completed by August 2022.

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

I welcome that response. Sessional interpreters were rightly considered to be key workers during the pandemic, and they continue to play a vital role in Covid recovery and in assisting the national health service and justice services.

However, trade unions have raised some concerns about fair work and seek assurance that the Government will do everything that it can to ensure that sessional interpreters who are employed in the public sector are covered by the terms of fair work. A meeting between the Scottish Trades Union Congress and the Minister for Just Transition, Employment and Fair Work, Richard Lochhead, was requested on 29 March, but, unfortunately, that meeting has not happened yet. Will the cabinet secretary take that meeting forward or ensure that a relevant minister meets with the STUC at the earliest opportunity?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I welcome the work that is undertaken by sessional interpreters at all times, but particularly the work they have done during Covid. That work would have been particularly significant for individuals during Covid—and, in the context of welcoming our guests from Ukraine, it is ever more important in our communities.

Monica Lennon properly reflects the Government’s support for the fair work agenda. Last week, I had a discussion with the STUC on relevant issues, and I would be happy to explore a meeting with ministers to address any of those concerns. I will make sure that that is taken forward as a consequence of this exchange.

Covid-19 Ventilation Short-Life Working Group

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

3. To ask the Scottish Government how its cross-Government Covid recovery policies will take account of the recommendations of its Covid-19 ventilation short-life working group. (S6O-01286)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Our ventilation short-life working group made 10 recommendations aimed at improving the following: awareness of the contribution that ventilation has in reducing the risk of transmission; regulations; guidance; technical skills; and air quality in buildings. Work is in hand to take forward the recommendations.

We are prioritising actions that can be taken quickly to improve ventilation, ahead of this winter, to improve our resilience against Covid-19 and other infections. I will write to all MSPs this afternoon to provide more detail than I can put on the record now on the Scottish Government’s progress on the recommendations.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s answer. I have had constituents and organisations getting in touch with me because the working group was due to publish its recommendations by March, but they are not on the Scottish Government website.

As the Deputy First Minister said, with Covid still being with us and one in 20 people in Scotland having Covid, it is more important than ever to improve indoor ventilation. Given that the recent report by the Royal Academy of Engineering showed that improved ventilation would add billions to the economy, could the Deputy First Minister say what higher standards or investment in ventilation he will deliver to keep people safe?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I acknowledge the importance of the point that Sarah Boyack has raised. The working group gave us very clear recommendations, and I will set out in a letter to members this afternoon the steps that we are taking.

Fundamentally and in principle, we accept the group’s recommendations about the importance of taking forward the ventilation strategy, improving ventilation in our buildings and recognising the benefit that improved ventilation has for the wellbeing of individuals—and for the wellbeing of the economy, into the bargain.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Many businesses, particularly in the hospitality sector, needed financial support to improve their ventilation. The Scottish Government set up a £25 million Covid business ventilation fund, but the fund paid out less than £1 million before closing. The Federation of Small Businesses Scotland said that the scheme was guilty of

“clunky admin systems and serious delays getting cash support to firms.”

Why was the fund such a failure?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We have to be careful about distribution of public money. On any other day, Mr Fraser would be citing to me the Audit Scotland report that demanded more information about distribution of public funding. On this occasion, he is asking me, in essence, to gather less information. On another day, he would demand that I collect more information.

We have committed to evaluating the 2021 business ventilation fund and we will consider the recommendations of the ventilation sub-group in light of that evaluation, while acknowledging that the Government has every interest in making sure that funding schemes that we make available are impactful in the business community, as was the case with Covid recovery funding. If there are lessons to learn about the administration of individual funds, we will learn them in order to make sure that the processes of the Government are efficient and smooth in all circumstances.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ruth Maguire joins us remotely for question 4.

Scottish Elections (Secret Ballot)

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made on ensuring that all voters in Scotland can exercise their right to a secret vote in Scottish elections. (S6O-01287)

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Adam, I hope that you caught enough of the question; it is in the

Business Bulletin

, anyway.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

The secrecy of the ballot is, of course, fundamental to our democracy. That is why we continue to work with partners to explore a number of practical solutions for voters who face barriers. The upcoming consultation on electoral reform is a further opportunity for people who have an interest to contribute ideas to that important agenda.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

As the minister said, voting independently and confidentially is one of the basic rights of our democracy.

It is unacceptable that many blind and partially sighted people still experience problems doing so. Will the minister commit to act as promptly as possible to ensure that that right is realised for all voters in Scotland at the next vote?

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

Blind and partially sighted people are one of the key groups that we have been working with to ensure that we get solutions to some of the problems.

Our programme for government contains an explicit commitment to improving accessibility of elections. It is understandable that progress over the past few years has not been as quick as we would have liked it to be, but as I have made clear on a number of occasions, I am committed to the agenda and want improvements to be made as soon as is practicable, as a result of the work that I mentioned.

Covid-19 Recovery Strategy (Community Resilience and Mental Health)

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

5. To ask the Scottish Government whether its Covid recovery strategy includes the provision of funding for charities working to strengthen community resilience and support mental health. (S6O-01288)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Covid recovery strategy highlights the importance of charities to community resilience. Our social enterprise and volunteering action plans will strengthen that role.

We have committed £120 million of recurring funding to support mental health and wellbeing, including £36 million over two years through the communities mental health and wellbeing fund for adults. The fund recognises the role of community groups and supports nearly 1,800 projects.

We are providing local authorities with £15 million per annum to fund more than 230 community mental health supports for children and young people, where the third sector is a delivery partner.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

During the pandemic, Yoker, in my Glasgow Anniesland constituency, was surveyed for community resilience as part of efforts by the Scottish Association for Mental Health, Inspire, Mind and

the Co-operative Group to understand what makes communities resilient and how that strengthens individuals’ mental health.

The Covid recovery strategy highlights how important communities are when it comes to tackling poor mental health and delivering support to the most marginalised people in society, who were often the most badly affected by the pandemic. Will the Scottish Government consider giving funding to charities that work on children and young people’s mental health and crisis prevention in marginalised communities, through the introduction of the whole family wellbeing fund?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I would be keen for the type of projects that Mr Kidd mentioned to be reflected in the whole family wellbeing fund. It provides us with an opportunity to recognise that some of the mental health challenges that individuals face are a consequence of a multiplicity of factors. It is by taking a holistic and, in some circumstances, a whole family approach, that we will address the issues.

During the pandemic, I had the pleasure of visiting an excellent project in Drumchapel in Mr Kidd’s constituency. That art-based project has been immensely successful in stimulating community engagement and helping to address the wellbeing of individuals. There is some very good learning from Mr Kidd’s constituency, which we can build upon.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Time and again at the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, we have heard about the essential role that third-party organisations have played in supporting people—young and old—with mental health issues and people with mental illness, while statutory services were letting them down.

The Covid-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the mental health of people across Scotland. For that reason, funding for charities and community initiatives will be more important than ever in the coming years. Access to services is crucial to supporting mental health.

Can the Deputy First Minister outline why more than 10,000 of our children and young people were refused access to mental health treatment during 2021? What assurances can he give me that urgent work is being undertaken to make services much more accessible, this year and beyond?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issue that Sue Webber has raised is obviously very important, but the judgments that have been arrived at are clinical judgments that have been made by the services involved. I would consider some of the issues that Sue Webber has fairly raised with me within the context of the whole family wellbeing analysis that we are undertaking. If we provide more effective support to individuals—through community organisations, in some circumstances—we can avoid the crystallisation of mental health and wellbeing challenges, because people will be better supported, more included and more assisted in their endeavour. That thinking has been brought to bear.

I am delighted that our local authority partners are working closely with us on the Covid recovery strategy in trying to make it a practical reality, but we need the engagement of the third sector—which I warmly welcome, because the third sector has a track record of being able to reach individuals who might be more challenging for statutory services to reach.

Proposed Brexit Freedoms Bill (Impact on Legislative Programme)

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

6. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the possible impact on its legislative programme of the United Kingdom Government’s proposed Brexit freedoms bill. (S6O-01289)

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

Natalie Don raises an important point. It is simply impossible at this stage to assess the full impact of the Brexit freedoms bill on the legislative programme, given how little information has been shared with us by the UK Government. We saw the full list of laws that the UK Government plans to change only when it was published last week. Mr Rees-Mogg has asked the public to identify which retained European Union laws they want to do away with, but he has not asked anyone, including the Scottish Government, which laws should be kept.

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

The lack of respect shown towards the devolved nations through the proposed bill is staggering, and the uncertainty that it is causing for the work of this Parliament is deeply concerning. Can the Scottish Government offer an assurance that it will provide what certainty it can by staying committed to the plans laid out in the programme for government and to the principles of the UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Continuity) (Scotland) Act 2021?

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

As Ms Don says, the Scottish people did not vote for Brexit. We have been clear that the Scottish Government believes that a future independent Scotland should seek to rejoin the EU as soon as possible and that maintaining alignment with current EU laws will help us to achieve that aim. It is impossible to know what the full consequences of the Brexit freedoms bill will be, given how little information there is. However, the main purpose of the bill appears to be to give the UK Government the freedom to abandon legislation that has protected Scottish interests for almost 50 years.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Farmers and fishers in the north-east already know that they were sold a bad deal by the Tories through Brexit, and they know that the Brexit freedoms bill will not provide them with what they need in order to continue in their chosen profession.

Can the minister indicate what plans and mitigations he thinks the Scottish Parliament should be considering to ensure that the proposed bill does not unduly affect people, particularly those in more marginal communities?

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

As I said, for 50 years, EU law has helped to set and maintain high standards, created clarity for Scottish business and provided confidence for consumers.

The stark choice facing the Scottish Government is that either we do away with those things, which would be complete and utter folly, or we spend parliamentary and Government time, which could otherwise be spent on addressing the cost of living crisis, on keeping them.

To support economically marginalised communities, the Scottish Government is tackling child poverty, reducing inequalities and supporting financial wellbeing, alongside providing social security payments that are not available anywhere else in the UK.

Covid-19 Recovery Strategy (NHS Recovery)

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what recent cross-Government discussions regarding the national health service’s recovery from the pandemic have taken place as part of its Covid recovery strategy. (S6O-01290)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In 2021, we published the NHS recovery plan, which set out commitments that will support recovery over the five years to 2026, supported by the implementation of improvements and new models of care. We have on-going discussions with key stakeholders, including the NHS, across Government and with other United Kingdom Governments around the recovery of the NHS. A full update on progress in the first year since publication will be published in September, after the parliamentary recess.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The recent statistics highlight the huge backlogs that have built up in our NHS. This year, the Scottish Government has been provided with the largest-ever core block grant, which should be used to its fullest to ensure that the NHS and public services are provided for.

Can the cabinet secretary indicate what lessons have been learned from discussions with other Governments across the UK to ensure that resources are targeted on the recovery of our public services?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That type of activity is right at the heart of the decisions that the Government takes on our priorities. In relation to the NHS, which is the subject of Mr Stewart’s question, we are looking at increasing NHS capacity to meet healthcare needs in the enhancing of primary care services and cancer services and in the transformation of mental health services.

All those points are right at the heart of the Government’s agenda to improve public services, to tackle the very clear impact of the pandemic on the waiting times of individuals for services and, as a consequence, we will endeavour to make as much progress as possible, as swiftly as possible, on improving public services.

Covid-19 Booster Vaccination Programme

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

8. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the role that the Covid-19 booster vaccination programme will play in its Covid recovery strategy. (S6O-01291)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Since its inception, the Scottish Government’s Covid-19 vaccination programme has been guided by expert advice provided by the joint committee on vaccination and immunisation. The JCVI is reviewing the emerging clinical evidence, including about vaccine waning, infection rates and hospitalisation.

In the interim advice in May, the JCVI recommended an autumn/winter 2022 booster programme for those at higher risk of severe Covid-19. Once the JCVI has reached a final position, we will confirm booster arrangements as quickly as possible to make sure that those who are most vulnerable have the protection that they need by this winter. We will continue to be guided by the JCVI advice and by that evidence, as we have been throughout this pandemic.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Given the recent increase in cases, I am sure that I will not be the only member of the Scottish Parliament receiving inquiries from constituents asking for information about when the fourth Covid vaccine booster will be available to those not in the three categories that are currently able to get it. I raise this matter following information provided to me that at St John’s centre in Perth, with which the Deputy First Minister will be very familiar, staff were very free to offer vaccinations because of the low number of patients who were attending.

Can the cabinet secretary tell me when the information about further groups will be available?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We are in the hands of the JCVI on this question. Liz Smith will understand that we rely on the JCVI for its advice. All Governments have followed its advice and that has served us well. We expect the advice to be with us so that we are in a position to roll out the programme, probably around the end of September or early October. However, I stress that that is conditional on us receiving the advice from the joint committee, which we do not yet have.

We have strong facilities in place around the country to enable us to deliver the vaccination programme. It has been an extraordinary success and we are keen to make sure that the population’s protection is boosted as a consequence of the decisions that we take in consequence of the JCVI advice.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next portfolio is net zero, energy and transport. If a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button or place an R in the chat function during the relevant question.

Gas Boiler Replacement

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what range of heating systems it anticipates will replace gas boilers in the near future. (S6O-01292)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

“Heat in Buildings Strategy—Achieving Net Zero Emissions in Scotland’s Buildings” identifies priority technologies that are available for deployment in the near term. Those that are relevant to homes that currently use gas boilers are—first of all, of course—energy efficiency improvements; individual heat pumps in certain buildings that currently use mains gas, namely those where assessment indicates short-term cost effectiveness and those in areas that are least likely to convert to hydrogen in the future; and heat networks in areas that are deemed to be suitable for them. Those are regarded as no-regrets and low-regrets options as, across all plausible pathways to net zero, they are likely to be the most cost effective zero-emissions options in the buildings that are identified.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Some already available low-carbon systems, including electric boilers and heat pumps, have limitations. Heat pumps are disruptive to install and are simply not practical or even possible for many households. Where they are viable, they are often prohibitively expensive. Electric boilers are costly to run.

Lord Willie Haughey, who is the biggest provider of heat pumps in the country, does not believe that they are a suitable replacement for domestic boilers. Will the minister tell me which low-carbon heat source, that would be comparable to the cost of a gas boiler, the Government currently recommends for houses and flats where people cannot afford, or are unable to install, heat pumps?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I have had the opportunity to meet Lord

Haughey

and discuss the issues with him. I know that he has strong views on the matter. However, the experience that we have and the comparable data that we have from countries that already have a long history of using heat pumps and heat networks show that they will be effective in Scotland.

As Pauline McNeill has pointed out, there are additional challenges in relation to flats and tenements, which make up about 40 per cent of Scotland’s homes, so it is clearly important that we make progress in that part of the domestic sector to meet our statutory climate change targets. It is a complex area, which is why we have established a tenements short-life working group to provide recommendations to the Scottish Government on regulating those homes. That group will provide its recommendations by the end of the year and we will respond by setting out our proposed approach as part of the forthcoming consultations.

It might well be that heat networks play a significant role in tenements and flats, compared with heat pumps at an individual level.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

As is set out in “Heat in Buildings Strategy”, when a heat pump replaces a modern efficient gas boiler, the greater efficiency of the heat pump might be insufficient to offset the higher price of electricity, which could increase the cost for the household. Therefore, will the Scottish Government urge the United Kingdom Government to rebalance energy prices to reduce the difference in unit costs between gas and electricity?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Yes, indeed.

Of course, there are many areas where heat pumps are already being deployed and where, combined with good levels of energy efficiency, the overall cost is coming down and will continue to come down. However, we have consistently called on the UK Government to take urgent action, using its reserved powers, to rebalance energy prices, so that the running costs of zero emission heating systems are comparable to, or more favourable than, fossil fuel incumbents.

We are again calling on the UK Government to take full account of the needs of Scottish consumers, particularly those who are suffering most from the impact of soaring energy bills when they proceed with rebalancing the costs of energy bills.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The number of boilers that need to be replaced in the coming years to meet the Scottish Government’s target is significant, to say the least. What measures is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that there is a sufficient number of professionals qualified to install and maintain heat pumps and other renewable heat technologies, in order to deliver the transition on schedule, and to prevent a lack of available contractors pushing up installation and servicing costs?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Mr Whittle is quite right to point out that not only the scale of installations that we need to see in the coming years but the acceleration toward much more rapid installation will be significant challenges. The work that we are doing on supply chains is critical, both in terms of the supply of the kit to be installed and in terms of the skills that are required to do that.

However, we see the situation very much as an opportunity, and not just as a challenge. We estimate that an additional 16,400 jobs can be supported across the economy by the end of this decade as a result of the investment in the deployment of zero emissions heat, and it is by giving that strong signal of our intention to regulate that we will give confidence to those who are investing in the manufacturing, skills and capacity to do the installation work.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am conscious that there is a lot of interest in this portfolio, so I ask for briefer questions and answers.

Publicly-owned Bus Services

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what actions it is taking to support the establishment of more publicly-owned bus services. (S6O-01293)

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

Section 34 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, entitled, “Provision of bus services etc by local transport authorities” came into force on 24 June, which was last Friday. It provides local transport authorities with the power to run their own services in any way that they see fit within the wider context of their obligations.

We have allocated £1 million in the Scottish budget for development of the community bus fund in 2022-23 to support local transport authorities to improve local bus services and explore the full range of options that are set out in the 2019 act, including local-authority-run bus services.

The fund complements our broader package of long-term investment in bus travel, including through support for bus services, concessionary schemes for bus users and more than £500 million that is being made available through the bus partnership fund.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

There has been a raft of service cuts across central Scotland, with driver shortages and efficiency cuts being blamed. When we should be increasing service provision, services are being cut. Stagecoach reported a profit of more than £32 million for the first half of the most recent financial year, yet the X28 service, which serves Cumbernauld in my region, is up for cancellation. Does the minister agree that more needs to be done to hold the private sector to account, and that more support for publicly owned bus services could ensure that the transport needs of our communities are truly supported?

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

I absolutely agree with the sentiment of the member’s question. It is worth pointing out that a considerable amount of public subsidy flowed to operators throughout the pandemic. I think that, from June 2020, they received more than £210 million. Ms Mackay will be aware of the additional funding that I announced to the sector only last week. That supports the sector with its continuing recovery from the pandemic and allows operators to respond to changed travel patterns that are arising from people working from home.

However, I am clear that subsidy from Government to private operators is not sustainable, and nor is it desirable in terms of the longer-term ambitions. Ms Mackay

made an important point in relation to the profit margins of some operators; the point is particularly pertinent because bus travel is one of the most affordable forms of public transport.

I will write to Stagecoach about its proposed cancellations. Ms Mackay has highlighted one today, and a number of members have written to me about cancellations in their constituencies in other parts of the country.

As I said, last week I announced additional funding. Bus operators that are in receipt of the network support grant plus are required to accept the conditions that set controls on fare rises and profits, and to have regard to, for example, fair work principles. I expect operators who benefit from that public funding not to reduce services but instead to look after the communities that they serve.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We have a number of supplementaries; they will have to be brief.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

There are too many bus deserts in this country, so the new powers are an opportunity to do things better. I like to be positive and to help the minister, so I have an idea for her. Will she convene a summit of councils and operators to consider the way forward?

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

I know that Mr Simpson likes to be helpful to me in my ministerial role, but I am ahead of him—I have already convened working groups with operators on the back of a call that I had with First Bus and Lothian Buses last week.

There are a number of challenges in that space at the moment. The first is in relation to service provision and long-term funding, and the second is driver shortages. That is a real challenge, so I want to work with operators to see what more the Government can do to support them, although we recognise the split in relation to devolved and reserved competences.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

The powers are enabling powers for councils to establish publicly owned bus services. For clarity, does the minister actually want councils to use the powers? Does she agree that the bus market is broken beyond repair and that councils must take back control of bus services? If they do that, does the minister believe that the community bus fund is sufficient?

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

Yes—I want local councils to run their own services. Why else would I stand here talking about the powers in an act that gives local authorities the power to do so?

With regard to whether the community bus fund is enough, we are working on the design and scope of the fund, which involves discussions with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities

and the Association of Transport Co-ordinating Officers. I recognise that £1 million is perhaps not as much as members might think there should be, but it gives us a good impetus to trial what the approach might look like in different parts of the country. That has to be done in partnership with local authorities.

I also reflect on the resource spending review, which allocated £46 million to the community bus fund for the remainder of this parliamentary session. Therefore, although that initial £1 million might seem small to Neil Bibby, the further funding that will flow—£30 million that has been allocated in the capital spending review—will also contribute. However, we have to allow local authorities to get the funding right for their local area. That is what the powers in the act allow them to do. I am keen to work with our local authority partners to deliver that.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Collette Stevenson, who joins us online, has a brief question.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

The Scottish Government has already responded to requests by local authorities to be empowered to run their own bus services. The Government has committed to investing more than £0.5 billion in long-term funding for bus-priority infrastructure and has expanded free bus travel to under-22s. Does the minister, therefore, look forward, as I do, to seeing how local authorities capitalise on the new powers and take advantage of the Scottish Government’s having placed buses at the forefront of our just transition to net zero?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please answer as briefly as possible, minister.

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

Yes. I agree with the sentiment of the question. As I outlined to Mr Bibby, I am really pleased that the Government is empowering our local authorities with flexible options to revitalise their local bus networks—including, of course, by running their own bus services. I look forward to working with them on delivery of their models.

Heat in Buildings Strategy

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether the £33 billion estimate in its “Heat in Buildings Strategy” to decarbonise Scotland’s buildings remains an accurate forecast amount. (S6O-01294)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

As we set out in the “Heat in Buildings Strategy”, £33 billion is the estimated total gross capital cost of converting our building stock to zero emissions heat. That estimate is purely indicative and is based on a single technology pathway, with cost assumptions derived from the best available evidence, including research published by the United Kingdom Climate Change Committee. The Scottish Government continues to keep cost estimates under review, incorporating new evidence as it becomes available.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

In relation to decarbonising the 600,000 homes for social rent in Scotland, the ZEST—zero emissions task force—report says:

“The fund will make £200 million available over the course of this parliament”.

That equates to £333 per property. What percentage of those properties already have energy performance certificate ratings of C or above? Do the minister’s projections show that £333 per property will be sufficient?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I do not have that particular statistic in front of me, but I am happy to have colleagues write to the member to set that out.

I am aware that social housing tends to have a higher energy efficiency performance than the private rented sector, so we should congratulate the social housing sector on that. I also thank the social housing sector for the contribution that it has made to the Government’s work on the ZEST report, the response to which was published recently and seems to have been very warmly received by the sector.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Can the minister outline how the actions that were set out in the “Heat in Buildings Strategy” will help to deliver the ambitious climate change goals?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, minister.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The strategy is a very broad, co-ordinated package of policies and support programmes, including £1.8 billion of investment, widening the scope of our capital and advice programmes and collaborating with a wide range of partners through the green heat finance task force. I am aware of the pressure of time—there is a great more detail in the strategy, and I encourage Bill Kidd, and all members, to work closely with us in the implementation of that strategy.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

I was alarmed to hear that a new social housing development in Dalmarnock in the east end of Glasgow is not being connected to the adjacent athletes’ village district heat network. Does the minister not share my concern and agree that there are huge opportunities for municipal development of those district heat networks that could refinance local government? Will he commit to developing a municipal strategy for ownership and development of district heat across Scotland?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The member is quite right to point out the huge potential not only for connecting social housing developments to existing heat networks, but for investing further, including in publicly owned heat networks. When I launched the strategy, I visited one in West Dunbartonshire, where the local authority has taken the lead in developing that capacity. One of the roles of the new national energy agency with be to work with local government to build capacity, for which there is huge potential in the years ahead.

Energy Performance Certificate Rating (Grant for Home Owners)

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

4. I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests.

To ask the Scottish Government what level of grant per property will be made available to assist home owners to achieve an energy performance certificate rating of band C or better by 2025. (S6O-01295)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

To clarify, our heat in buildings strategy proposes that homes that are purchased from 2025 will need to reach a minimum energy efficiency standard that is equivalent to EPC band C, with all homes to achieve that standard by the backstop date of 2033.

A cashback grant of up to £13,500 is available to households for energy efficiency measures and zero emissions heating systems through our Home Energy Scotland loan and cashback scheme. We have committed to replacing the cashback element with a standalone grant during 2022-23, and we have doubled the budget to £42 million.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

In the case of old stone properties, getting to EPC band C will not be easy. For example, it has been suggested that getting Bute House to EPC band C will cost in excess of half a million pounds. The level of the grants that are being mentioned will not be sufficient for most houses to reach the required standard. What does the minister consider to be a reasonable investment in a property to reach EPC band C, and will he cap expenditure at that level?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I am pleased to hear that there is ambition for the level of support that needs to be available. I am sure that that is intended as an endorsement of the fact that the Scottish Government is providing more support on this agenda than the United Kingdom Government is on its equivalent.

We have a huge challenge, particularly in remote and rural areas, in tenement stock—as I mentioned to Pauline McNeill—and in older and historic buildings. All that will be considered in detail as we consult on the detail of the regulations, which will include measures relating to how we define the cost effectiveness of the measures that will be required.

Renewable Energy (Community Involvement)

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

5. To ask the Scottish Government how it will ensure that the future development of renewable energy involves communities meaningfully. (S6O-01296)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Community and locally owned energy has an important role to play in a just transition to net zero, and it will form a key part of the forthcoming energy strategy just transition plan.

The Scottish Government is committed to supporting the growth of community and local energy in Scotland through mechanisms such as our flagship community and renewable energy scheme—CARES.

We have long-standing good practice principles for community benefits from, and shared ownership of, onshore renewable energy developments. They set the national standards that we encourage renewables developers and communities to utilise.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

Communities in Caithness and Sutherland live in an area that is rich in natural resources and renewable energy potential; however, many there feel that their communities are being left behind, with little to no consideration of their views or benefit.

How will the cabinet secretary ensure that at least 20 per cent of new onshore wind is community and publicly owned?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

As I mentioned, we have a range of measures through the CARE scheme, which helps to support community and locally owned energy projects. To date, we have almost 900MW of capacity through community and locally owned renewable energy projects, and we want to get that up to 2GW by 2030.

We encourage the developers to ensure that they are engaging in a meaningful way with local communities and are looking at community shared ownership models. However, we cannot compel developers to do that, because legislating in that area is reserved to the United Kingdom Government.

I would like us to go further. Despite the fact that we have limited powers in those areas, we provide good practice guidance, which we encourage developers to utilise when they are taking forward local projects.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

My apologies, but I am not able to take supplementaries on that question.

Railway Station for Newburgh (STAG Appraisal)

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

6. To ask the Scottish Government when it expects a decision to be reached on a railway station for Newburgh in Fife following the publication of the Newburgh and area Scottish transport appraisal guidance appraisal. (S6O-01297)

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

The Scottish Government has provided the South East of Scotland Transport Partnership—SEStran—with funding from the local rail development fund for the Newburgh transport appraisal.

SEStran

has advised that it intends to send Transport Scotland the detailed options appraisal report for the Newburgh transport appraisal in the next few weeks. That is the third and final stage of a transport appraisal in line with the Scottish transport appraisal guidance, which is known as STAG. A completed, clear and robust strategic business case is required in line with STAG before any further consideration can be made for any new proposals.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The community is very hopeful that the railway option will be highly thought of in the appraisal, because they feel cut off, even though the railway runs through the middle of Newburgh. The community, which is united, has been waiting for years for something to happen, so I want to press the minister on the issue. I know that the report will be handed over to Transport Scotland soon, but how long will it take for it to consider the report? When does she expect a decision to be reached?

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

I very much recognise the feeling of hope in the local community that Mr Rennie has described. He will know of the situation in my constituency and of the long-running campaign to re-establish the railway network in the Levenmouth area. I also understand the community’s feelings of disconnection from the wider rail infrastructure, recognising the geography of where Newburgh sits in the kingdom of Fife.

As I outlined in my initial answer, there is a process to be adhered to. That was the case with the reopening of the Levenmouth line and it has been the case with other rail lines in the past. As Willie Rennie will know, the strategic transport projects review 2 does not make any distinct recommendations in that regard.

Mr Rennie has asked a specific question about timescales. At this time, Transport Scotland has yet to receive the detailed options appraisal. I will ask my officials to provide my office with the timescale once the report has been received for review. I will be happy to share the details of that with the member once we have received the report.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mark Ruskell has a supplementary question. I ask that he be brief.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The Newburgh study was funded by the local rail development fund, alongside a range of other community projects across Scotland. Will the minister give an assurance that, now that those projects are coming to the end of the STAG process, all of them will be considered when it comes to allocating funds for rail infrastructure investment under control period 7?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Be very brief, minister.

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

I join the member in paying tribute to the hard-working community groups across the country, such as the one that we heard Mr Rennie speak of. Last Friday, I was in the north-east, where I heard from a campaign group about the re-establishment of rail in that part of the country. Of course, it is for that reason that the Government created the local rail development fund. The projects that Mr Ruskell mentioned are under way and are being considered under STAG. Projects that present a strong business case will be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, there must be local input into the process, which is one of the LRDF’s strengths.

Water Quality (Rivers)

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve water quality in Scotland’s rivers. (S6O-01298)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

As I announced in my ministerial statement to Parliament last December, the publication of Scotland’s third river basin management plans sets out our objective to continue to improve water quality across Scotland from 87 per cent currently at good or better condition to 92 per cent by 2027.

The plans are complemented by Scottish Water’s “Improving Urban Waters—Route Map”, which sets out a programme of continued action to reduce waste water pollution and sewage litter over the coming decade, with investment of £500 million.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Ecologists, conservationists and anglers have all expressed concern about the recent decline in wild salmon and sea trout stocks in Scotland’s waterways, with stocks reaching record lows this year. Declining fish populations are also being affected, and the wider ecosystem is being damaged. The issue requires urgent action from the Scottish Government. What immediate steps is the minister taking to deliver on the Government’s commitment to improve water quality?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Scottish Government takes our declining salmon stocks very seriously, and we are working with stakeholders to safeguard that iconic species. The Scottish wild salmon strategy, which was published in January 2022, sets out the vision, objectives and priority themes that will drive our efforts to protect and recover the species. A priority theme of the strategy is improving the conditions of rivers and giving salmon free access to cold, clean waters. Work is now under way, with our stakeholders, to prepare a detailed implementation plan to accompany the strategy.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Jenni Minto has a very brief supplementary question.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

The campaign group River Action UK has stated that the UK Government’s draft targets for water quality to replace the European Union’s water framework directive show a general lack of ambition to improve the natural environment. We know that the Tory Brexit project was facilitated—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

This supplementary question is not brief.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Please will the minister give the chamber reassurance that, in Scotland, we continue to value the natural environment and that the Scottish Government will continue to work to further protect the ecological condition of Scotland’s water environment?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am happy to do so. The big picture is that, after a decade of investment by Scotland’s public water company, supported by independent regulation by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency—SEPA—and backed by nearly £700 million, 66 per cent of water in Scotland is of good quality. That is above the European average of 45 per cent, and it is far above that of our neighbours in England and Wales, where the figure for good water quality is 16 per cent.

National Generation Target for Solar Energy

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

8. To ask the Scottish Government when it plans to set a national generation target for solar energy as it has for wind and hydrogen. (S6O-01299)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The Scottish Government recognises the importance of energy that is generated from solar photovoltaic cells in contributing to the decarbonisation of Scotland’s energy supply and in helping us to meet our target of having a net-zero-emissions society by 2045. In support of that, the Scottish Government will, in consultation with the solar sector, establish a vision for the future of solar energy in the forthcoming energy strategy and just transition plan, which will be published later this year.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I am very pleased to hear that the cabinet secretary is engaging with the solar industry and that he will establish a vision in the forthcoming revised energy strategy, but I ask him to consider seriously the inclusion of specific targets in the vision that is to be established. For example, it has been suggested that the minimum target should be in the region of 4GW by 2030 and that the level of our ambition should be set at 6GW.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I am grateful for the member’s question, and I am conscious that a number of members in the chamber have an interest in the issue. I assure the

member that, as part of the work that we will do in developing our energy strategy, we will consider the overall vision for solar PV and solar energy in Scotland.

The member will recognise that we also have to adopt an approach that recognises the whole energy system and capacity in the network, which is one factor that we will take into account. I have no doubt that those who are involved in Scotland’s solar energy sector will have an opportunity to feed into the energy strategy as we take forward our public and sectoral engagement plan during the coming months.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. That concludes portfolio questions on net zero, energy and transport. There will be a brief pause while those on the front benches change.

Rural Affairs and Islands

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Today’s final portfolio is rural affairs and islands. If a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button or enter the letter R in the chat function during the relevant question. Succinct questions and answers will allow as many members as possible to have their voice heard.

Rural Communities (Storms)

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what preparations have been made to protect the economy of rural communities in areas like South Scotland from a repeat of the storms experienced last year. (S6O-01300)

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

The Scottish Government is working with resilience partnerships to ensure that the recommendations of the storm Arwen review are implemented.

We are also investing in a broad range of activities that will make the south of Scotland economy more competitive and resilient to such threats in the future. Thirty-seven million pounds was allocated to South of Scotland Enterprise in 2022-23, which will enable it to work with businesses and communities to create jobs and attract investment; and £3.6 million across 2021-22 and 2022-23 through our place-based investment programme will support town centre and community-led regeneration in the south of Scotland. Through the Borderlands growth deal, we are investing £85 million in strategic projects that are designed to boost innovation in key industry sectors, enhance regional connectivity and deliver critical business infrastructure to support economic growth.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

The response from local communities to storms last year and earlier this year was admirable, and it is vital that communities be included in the development of all future local resilience plans. Will the Scottish Government work with local people, local businesses, many of which are very small in the south of Scotland, and councils to ensure that local small business economies do not face long-term adverse impacts of storms in the future, thus protecting local businesses and rural economy jobs?

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

The member raises important points. Engagement and partnership working are critical if we are going to address such challenges in the future.

I know that an update report on the back of the storm Arwen review was published last week, which set out some of the actions that we have already taken based on the recommendations. There will be a further update in the coming months, because within that time we have had the report from the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, too.

I reiterate that partnership and working in collaboration with our communities and local businesses is crucial and will be part of that work.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

I welcome the reports of the Scottish Government and the United Kingdom Government on the handling of storm Arwen. Resilience planning is predicated on the good work and good will of voluntary community groups. Is the cabinet secretary confident that the Scottish Government will support succession planning for volunteer response groups financially through the winter preparedness plans, particularly as we now see a growing elderly population in rural areas?

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

The member raises a serious and important issue, which I am sure will be given due consideration. As I have set out in my previous response to Carol Mochan about acting on the recommendations, we want to learn as many lessons as possible from storm Arwen and ensure that we implement those changes ahead of the coming winter. I am sure that decisions such as the one that the member raises will factor into that consideration too.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Last year’s storms represented a pattern of adverse weather that is largely unprecedented. There can be little doubt that climate change has a role to play in new extremes, such as those that we saw in 2021.

How will initiatives such as the winter preparedness programme help ensure that we can cope with new patterns of weather as they emerge?

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

In Scotland, well-established and adaptable resilience arrangements have been developed and tested over a number of years. That continuous improvement is at the heart of our approach to emergency planning. The winter preparedness programme, which the Scottish resilience partnership will lead in the coming months, will seek to ensure that we learn the key lessons from the Scottish Government’s storm Arwen review and that those lessons are embedded ahead of the coming winter.

It is important to note that the programme will review in particular the plans and arrangements for the activation of our resilience structures across the country, mutual aid between areas and organisations, public communications, how we support vulnerable people and further engagement of the voluntary and community sector in our emergency response processes.

Crown Estate Scotland (Meetings)

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

2. To ask the Scottish Government when the rural affairs secretary last met with Crown Estate Scotland. (S6O-01301)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands met Crown Estate Scotland on Monday 27 June 2022 as part of a wider group at the Scottish agriculture council, and I attended that meeting, too. However, as minister with portfolio responsibility for Crown Estate Scotland, I formally meet it three times a year, and the most recent meeting in that regard was on 23 April.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

In 2018, the Scottish Government established a due diligence test to establish the human rights and corruption records of the companies with which it does business. That was after it dealt with Chinese companies that were connected to the abuse of human rights.

Liberal Democrat research, reported in

The Scotsman

today, shows that Crown Estate Scotland did not seem to know that that diligence test existed when it was awarding ScotWind sea bed leases. It invented its own test; in effect, it asked companies involved whether they had done anything wrong recently. That meant that Japanese company Marubeni, which paid corruption fines as recently as 2014, did not need to declare those fines.

The Scottish Government promised to change its ways but, in the biggest sale for years, it seems that Government bodies are still not performing stringent checks on who they partner with. Given that the Government insisted that ScotWind leases were sold on the basis of quality, not price—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Can we have a question, please, Mr Cole-Hamilton?

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

—should we take it that evidence of corruption is not a bar in the Government’s assessment of what quality looks like?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The ScotWind programme is administered by Crown Estate Scotland, independently of ministers. As part of Crown Estate Scotland’s due diligence, it required all bidders to submit a formal written legal declaration that they had not been convicted of unlawful activity, including fraud, bribery and corruption. Only companies that provided that legal declaration were able to proceed. That process was not invented, as it has been characterised; it was consistent with the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015.

However, ScotWind terms and conditions make it clear that Crown Estate Scotland reserves the right to void any application if false information is found to have been provided. Crown Estate Scotland will not hesitate to take action, if need be, and the Scottish Government supports it in that regard.

Seed Potato Industry (Impact of Brexit)

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what its latest assessment is of the impact of Brexit on the Scottish seed potato industry. (S6O-01302)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The loss of the European Union seed potato export market as a result of Brexit and the United Kingdom Government’s failure to secure an equivalence agreement on seed potatoes with the EU continues to have a very negative impact on Scottish exporters.

We previously exported about 20,000 tonnes of seed potatoes to the EU and 2,000 tonnes to Northern Ireland. The removal of those markets overnight has cost an estimated £11 million. That is a significant financial sum for the country, but it also affects the livelihoods of people and families across Scotland. Therefore, it is vital that all options continue to be explored in order to find a resolution. I can assure John Mason that the Scottish Government continues to press the UK Government at every opportunity.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Recently, the NFU Scotland president, Martin Kennedy, said that he is concerned that the UK and EU “remain at loggerheads” and that Scottish seed potato growers are the ones who are “paying the price”. It seems clear that that is a failure of Brexit. What engagement has the minister or others in the Scottish Government had with the UK Government about that harm to our agricultural sector?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I welcome the efforts of the NFUS and other seed potato representatives on the issue, and I share their concerns. We continually raise the impact on the sector of the loss of the EU and NI markets. We do that through a multitude of platforms—most notably, in our interministerial Government meetings, but we have also sent repeated letters.

I stress that the problem is a direct result of the UK Government’s refusal to commit to dynamic alignment. I am very disappointed by the UK Government’s lack of progress, and I am equally disappointed by its decision to allow ware growers in England and Wales to purchase EU seed while Scottish growers are blocked from selling their seed to the EU. That is further undermining the industry, and we will continue to press the UK Government to make progress.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 4 has been withdrawn.

Salmon Scotland (Brexit)

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports from Salmon Scotland that bureaucracy as a result of Brexit is costing the industry £3 million per annum to export to the European Union and is threatening Scotland’s competitiveness. (S6O-01304)

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

The figure that has been quoted by one of Scotland’s key industry bodies for the increased costs that exporters face as a result of European Union exit comes as no surprise. The Scottish Government repeatedly warned the United Kingdom Government that our forced exit from the EU would be damaging to Scottish export businesses. It is hugely disappointing that increased costs are threatening the competitiveness of Scotland’s most valuable food exports.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

Scottish salmon is highly prized globally, and the cabinet secretary will be aware that Salmon Scotland is calling for the full roll-out of digital export health certificates by the UK Government in order to reduce Brexit red tape. Does she share my view that the hard work of our salmon producers is currently being undermined and that the best possible future for our salmon industry would be an independent Scottish Government with the powers to make decisions that protect and support Scotland’s exports and interests?

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

I have to say that I entirely agree. We know that, in 2021, £788 million of Scottish seafood was exported to the European Union, but £372 million of that was Scottish salmon and Salmon Scotland reported losses of at least £11 million in January 2021 alone as a direct result of the changes that have been brought about by Brexit.

We have to remember that a lot of those costs are on-going. Salmon Scotland also estimates that businesses are continuing to spend approximately £200,000 a month on extra paperwork, and that cost continues to mount as inexcusable delays to the roll-out of the digitisation project continues. Just last month, the Food and Drink Federation Scotland published a report that set out that, among other food and drink export sectors, the strong growth in seafood products has driven Scotland’s recent economic recovery. We therefore cannot allow the Tories to further impact on the sector, which has been so resilient during these recent extraordinary times.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I share the views that people have about the damage that has ben caused by Brexit, particularly to the seafood sector, including salmon. I have Pittenweem harbour in my constituency, and it is suffering because of it. A trade war would be damaging, which is why I do not understand why the Scottish Government is pursuing the route of putting up more borders, particularly a border with England, which would be equally damaging, if not more so. With hindsight, has the minister not reflected on her position on independence and more borders?

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

I can confirm that I have not reflected on my position on independence. The fact that we are in this position, that I have the dealings with the UK Government that I do and that I see the damage that is continuously being inflicted on businesses in Scotland has, if anything, strengthened my resolve to pursue independence.

Scottish Animal Welfare Commission (Greyhound Racing)

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission’s call for the closure of unlicensed greyhound racing tracks in Scotland. (S6O-01305)

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

The Scottish Government will carefully consider any recommendations from the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee and the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission for possible licensing or other regulation of greyhound racing in Scotland in due course.

I corresponded with the committee on 16 May 2022, to inform it that greyhound racing is in the work plan of the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission as an issue to be considered in the medium term and that any recommendations that are made on the possible licensing or other regulation of greyhound racing will be carefully considered in due course.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the cabinet secretary for her response, and for her response to the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee. It is clear that sending dogs around a track at 40mph, with a high risk of collision, is unacceptably cruel, with injuries at the Shawfield track almost doubling between 2018 and 2020. That is why the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission is backing an end to unregulated tracks, with the Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, OneKind and others calling for an end to greyhound racing altogether. Is the cabinet secretary prepared to consider a ban?

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

The member has raised some really important points, and I reassure him and other members across the chamber about just how seriously the Scottish Government takes animal welfare and ensuring that Scotland has the highest possible welfare standards.

It is important to remember that people who mistreat animals can now face up to five years in prison and unlimited fines under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 and the Animals and Wildlife (Penalties, Protections and Powers) (Scotland) Act 2020. We know that the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission will be considering the issue and the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee has also been taking evidence on the issue through consideration of a petition. We will consider seriously any recommendations that come out of those considerations.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

It is not just on unlicensed tracks such as Thornton that injuries and deaths of greyhounds take place. Over a three-year period, 15 dogs were killed at the licensed track at Shawfield and nearly 200 were injured, while numerous dogs were found with drugs in their systems. Surely the evidence is already clear that it is time for the Government to end this animal abuse once and for all and ban greyhound racing.

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

I agree with some of what the member has said about some of the truly horrendous figures and cases that we hear about. Again, we are committed to ensuring that Scotland has the highest possible animal welfare standards, which is why we introduced the increased penalties that we did in the Animals and Wildlife (Penalties, Protections and Powers) (Scotland) Act 2020.

I look forward to the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee’s recommendations because it is only right that I give them and the work of the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission due consideration.

Food Production

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to safeguard food production. (S6O-01306)

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

High quality, nutritious food that is locally and sustainably produced is key to our wellbeing, in economic, environmental, social and health terms. Our vision for Scottish agriculture, which was published in March, outlines our aims to support and work with farmers and crofters to meet more of our food needs sustainably and to manage our land sustainably with nature.

We are working with the agriculture reform implementation oversight board to develop new proposals for sustainable farming support, and we will be launching a consultation to inform a new Scottish agriculture bill later this year.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The principles outlined in the Scottish land rights and responsibilities statement are not enforceable, and because of that we see farms being turned into forests to offset landowners’ environmentally damaging activities elsewhere. Meanwhile, we face a global food shortage. When will the Scottish Government put in place enforceable responsibilities and principles to ensure that landowners manage their land in the public interest or forfeit that land?

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

The member raises a vitally important issue, and it is because of that issue that the interim principles were established. The Minister for Environment and Land Reform will undertake a programme of engagement to ensure that the principles are being adhered to, and, of course, a land reform bill will be introduced in due course. I would be happy to follow that up with the member and provide further information.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Yesterday, the Westminster Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill Committee took evidence on gene editing. There is a widespread view in agriculture in Scotland that gene editing is a good move and would improve crop yields and resilience, which are part of our food security.

The committee heard that the European Union is definitely moving down the same route, so the issue is now not about divergence, but about whether Scotland will get left behind. It is only the dogma of the Scottish National Party Government that prevents Scotland from joining the rest of the United Kingdom and adopting this important technology.

The door is open for the minister to put aside blind adherence to EU laws and join the UK in developing this important technology. I ask once again: when will the Scottish Government set out how it will address the GE question that everyone is waiting for clarity on?

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

We have said that we will continue to monitor the EU’s position on the issue and the work that is happening there, and that is exactly what we will continue to do.

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

The report of the short-life food security and supply task force sets out a number of areas relating to food security that are reserved to the UK Government. The Scottish Government’s commitment to food production is clearly demonstrated through its commitment to active farming. Given that some of the levers on food security are reserved, what response, if any, has the Scottish Government had from the UK Government regarding the report’s findings?

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

In March, together with industry, I established the short-life food security and supply task force to, in essence, monitor the disruption to the food and drink supply chain resulting from the impact of the war in Ukraine. The task force reported last Thursday, when I wrote to the UK Government to highlight the findings that we provided in the report.

The task force recognised that, inevitably, there are limits on what we can influence because of the global factors at play. The reality is that the UK Government holds many of the levers that could help to address many of the issues that we need to tackle.

I have not yet received a response, but we will of course continue to urge the UK Government to take action. The rapid response by the Scottish Government in establishing the task force has been really important. I sincerely hope that we see that same focus emerge at the UK level.

Islands Bond Scheme

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

8. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the proposed islands bond scheme, including when it expects to publish the outcome of its consultation. (S6O-01307)

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

The delivery of the islands bond scheme is still being carefully considered in the light of the strong feedback that we received from island residents, and in the context of the current energy crisis and rising living costs that are being experienced by many islanders.

Further details will be announced later this summer as part of the response to the 12-week consultation in an analysis report. We expect to publish the analysis of that consultation in the coming weeks.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of the concerns that I have about the original concept behind islands bonds, but she will also be aware that I believe that the funding can help us to achieve the objective of attracting and retaining population by making our island communities more resilient. To that end, will she agree to look at the idea of perhaps using islands bonds in conjunction with community funding to allow a third aircraft to operate across the north isles in Orkney, which would provide improved transport links, connectivity and job opportunities for those who choose to live in the islands?

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

I know that the member has previously raised questions and concerns on the issue. In addition to the online consultation that we undertook, officials have undertaken a series of visits to our islands and taken part in further engagement with our communities to find out what is important to them, so that we can listen to that feedback and act on it. That is exactly what we intend to do.

As I said, a lot of work has been done since the consultation. We are analysing all the feedback to that at the moment, and we will make announcements in due course.

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

The Scottish Government has made clear its commitment to retaining people in our island communities and attracting people to live in those communities. Does the cabinet secretary agree that many young people face particular challenges in staying in island communities, and that support needs to be provided to enable them to maintain their vital role in those communities?

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

I absolutely do. Our young people have a vitally important role to play, whether by contributing socially, culturally or economically to our islands. That is why, as part of the national islands plan, we created a young islanders network, which is made up of young people from all Scottish islands. It will have a consultative role in the implementation of the national islands plan, to ensure that the interests and the priorities of our young people are fully considered in the delivery of the plan.

Child Poverty

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Shona Robison on the “Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan: Fourth year progress report 2021-22”. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Today, I have published the fourth annual progress report that is due under the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017. It is the final report on the progress that has been delivered against our first tackling child poverty delivery plan, “Every Child, Every Chance: The Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2018-22”, and it summarises the progress that has been delivered across 2021-22 and the key milestones that we have achieved since the plan was published in 2018.

In the past year, we have continued to address the impacts of Covid and to support recovery from it. We have also helped families who have faced increased household costs through our winter support fund.

The report showcases the breadth of activity that is under way, which is supported by partnerships across Scotland. It highlights that we have delivered on all 68 of the actions that we committed to, including the additional actions that have been committed to since the plan was first published.

The report sets out the latest estimates of spend on targeted support for low-income households. Almost £2.6 billion of spend was targeted in that way in 2021-22, of which more than £1.1 billion benefited children. Across the four years of “Every Child, Every Chance”, we are estimated to have targeted almost £8.5 billion at low-income households, of which nearly £3.3 billion benefited children.

The report also presents the latest available data on persistent poverty for children, which shows a marked drop compared with previous estimates, from 15 to 10 per cent. Although that is welcome, further data will be required to determine how much of that observed fall is due to real change and will be sustained in coming years. We anticipate that we will be able to publish updated statistics against all measures in March 2023.

Over the past year, we have continued to deliver for children and families across Scotland. We have continued to increase incomes through social security. Following the launch of the Scottish child payment in February 2021, we went on to award £55.1 million to low-income families in 2021-22; it is estimated that, as of the end of March 2022, we had provided support to 103,000 children.

Through bridging payments, we put almost £80 million into the pockets of low-income families with school-age children, providing up to £520 for each eligible child, with 148,500 children benefiting as of spring 2022.

We expanded eligibility for child winter heating assistance to a further 4,500 young people who are in receipt of the personal independence payment and launched the child disability payment and the pilot of the adult disability payment.

Supported by our investment, 139 general practice surgeries in the most deprived areas now have welfare advisers in place; we are providing access to advice in the places that people go. In addition, to support financial wellbeing and recovery from the Covid pandemic, we put more than £68.9 million into the pockets of Scottish households through low-income pandemic payments.

We have delivered actions to address the impact of the cost of living and reduce household costs, including delivering 1,140 hours of funded early learning and childcare hours across Scotland as of August 2021. The latest data from January 2022 shows that 88 per cent of children are accessing the full 1,140 hours, which is estimated to save families up to £4,900 per child in 2021.

We expanded the universal provision of free school meals to all children in primaries 4 and 5, provided alternate free school meal provision in school holidays to around 144,000 children from low-income families and further increased the value of the school clothing grant to £120 for eligible children in primary school and £150 for those in secondary. In addition, from 31 January this year, we extended concessionary travel to under-22s who live in Scotland. Approximately 930,000 young people are eligible for support, which is estimated to save families up to £3,000 by the time their child turns 18.

We have also supported more parents to increase their earnings from employment by continuing to deliver support through devolved employability services and through our focus on fair work. That includes strengthening our fair work first criteria to include offering flexible and family-friendly working to all workers from day 1 of employment, increasing the take-home pay of more than 7,600 workers through living wage accreditation and launching the real living hours accreditation campaign. Beyond those steps, we invested £41 million in our winter support fund to help low-income households that have been impacted by rising living and fuel costs.

“Every child, every chance: tackling child poverty delivery plan 2018-2022” was published shortly after the ambitious child poverty targets were set in statute in the Parliament, marking a change in focus and approach to tackling child poverty in Scotland. The plan set out the three key drivers of child poverty reduction: work and earnings, social security and household costs. It also set out the need to focus efforts on the six priority family types that are at greatest risk of poverty. Although the world was very different when “Every child, every chance” was published, those drivers have remained constant and remain vital to our approach.

Over that time, we have built our collective understanding and awareness of poverty and strengthened the foundations of support that already existed in Scotland, and we have used the powers that are devolved to this Parliament to go further than we ever have before. That includes establishing our devolved social security system and delivering 12 benefits, of which seven are entirely new and not available anywhere else in the United Kingdom, including our Scottish child payment.

With those powers we are providing unparalleled financial support across the early years that, by the end of this year, will be worth a maximum of more than £10,000 for a family’s first child by the time that they turn six. That is over £8,200 more than is available elsewhere in the UK.

We have delivered devolved employability services that are based on dignity and respect, and have continued to do everything that we can to promote fair work, despite key powers over employment being reserved to the UK Government.

We have almost doubled funded childcare hours, significantly increased school clothing grants and delivered more than 9,757 affordable homes, of which 7,306 were for social rent. In addition, we have taken key steps to strengthen our overall approach to tackling child poverty, including establishing our statutory Poverty and Inequality Commission.

We also reached a groundbreaking agreement with the Scottish Green Party that sets out our shared focus on tackling child poverty and influencing key measures, including free bus travel for under-22s and our commitment to mitigate the benefit cap.

The progress that we have made was made despite significant challenges. Covid has changed all our lives immeasurably and has disproportionately impacted the most disadvantaged people in our society. We have also seen the continued impact of United Kingdom Government welfare cuts and austerity, in particular over the past year. Recent analysis highlighted that reversing the UK Government welfare cuts that have been imposed since 2015 would put an additional £780 million into the pockets of Scottish households in 2023-24, helping to lift 70,000 people, including 30,000 children, out of poverty.

In 2021-22, not only did we continue to deliver progress against our first tackling child poverty delivery plan, but we worked with partners to develop our second such plan for the period to 2026. “Best Start, Bright Futures: tackling child poverty delivery plan 2022 to 2026” builds on the strong foundations laid by “Every Child, Every Chance” and sets out ambitious action to drive progress towards the targets and lift thousands of children out of poverty, which is backed by up to £113 million of additional investment this year. The plan outlines how we will work in partnership across Scotland with the public, private and third sectors and communities to take forward our national mission.

Covid has impacted on the delivery of key commitments, including our affordable housing supply programme and parental employability support fund. In “Best Start, Bright Futures”, we set out how we will regain lost ground and go on to scale up the impact of key programmes, including through our new employability offer to parents.

In April, we doubled the Scottish child payment to £20 per child per week, and it will rise to £25 by the end of the year. We have also increased the value of a further eight Scottish social security benefits by 6 per cent, providing much-needed support to families.

Our commitment to tackling child poverty is underpinned by the recently published resource spending review, which sets out high-level plans for how funding will be invested in the coming years to meet our priorities.

The progress report that was published today sets out the considerable action that has been delivered since 2018, resulting in strengthened support for children and families across Scotland. This Government is absolutely committed to tackling child poverty and is now focusing on the implementation and delivery of the best start, bright futures plan, building on the foundations of the past four years and the significant learning over that time.

I look forward to taking questions from members about progress over this reporting period.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

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

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement.

One group of children and young people did not merit comment by the cabinet secretary today: children who live in temporary accommodation. I have raised the issue consistently with the cabinet secretary and make no apology for doing so again.

Today in Scotland, 7,500 children are living in temporary accommodation. Many of those children have been housed in temporary accommodation for months or years. The typical stay for a family has doubled to more than 58 weeks, which has rightly been described as a “national disgrace”. Does the cabinet secretary think that that is acceptable? Will ministers consider proposals to ban placement of children in temporary accommodation?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I agree with Miles Briggs that the number of households who are in temporary accommodation is too high: we are firmly committed to reducing it. Alongside

our ambitious programme of affordable housing building, we are providing £52.5 million for local authorities to implement their rapid rehousing transition plans and housing first approaches.

Miles Briggs will be aware that a working group that includes a lot of expertise is looking at what more can be done to tackle what is a difficult issue in some parts of Scotland—the situation is not uniform everywhere. I met key people from the group just a couple of weeks ago to hear about the progress of their work.

Housing is a key part of our mission to tackle child poverty. That is reflected in the resource spending review, which includes increased resources to prevent homelessness and to provide more warm and affordable homes. We will continue to do that.

My final observation is that there has to be consistency in the policy programme. I gently suggest to Miles Briggs that a commitment to allow the sale of housing association properties would not be a good route to go down. [

Interruption

.] I am glad that Miles Briggs is saying that that is not a way that would be followed in Scotland. As the Prime Minister has set out, that is the way things will be going in England, so it would be heartening to hear more from Miles Briggs on that, as I do not think that we have heard much from him on it. We cannot allow homes that are built under the affordable housing programme to be lost in the same way as—if I recall correctly—up to about 500,000 council houses were lost.

I will continue to focus on tackling temporary accommodation and on ensuring that the working group gets our full support in coming up with the solutions that will be required.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement.

The tone of the statement that we just heard was celebratory, but this is no time to pat ourselves on the back. Some 260,000 children are still in poverty in Scotland. A report that was published last week by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Save the Children said that we are “unlikely” to meet our targets, and described the Scottish Government’s approach to tackling poverty as being good on diagnosis but short on prescription. Scottish National Party ministers have chosen to close their eyes and just to hope for the best. We are in a cost of living crisis—there is no fair wind and this is not a good day. The Government must do more; it cannot rely on hope and optimism alone.

Now, more than ever, we need real concrete action on all the drivers of poverty. But where is it? We cannot wait until the next delivery plan to identify what more is needed. By then, it will be too late. It is not just me saying that—the Government’s own Poverty and Inequality Commission is saying it, too. People across Scotland need to know what the Government is going to do to lift them out of poverty.

When will the Government acknowledge the gravity, scale and pace that are required in this situation? When will it start using all the powers of this Parliament to address the situation? What will it do about that, right now?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

First, I do not accept that my statement was “celebratory”. It set out the measures that we have taken in relation to the first child poverty delivery plan, then it set out how we segment it into “Best Start, Bright Futures: Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2022-2026”, the second child poverty delivery plan, and it ended by saying that we now have to implement that in order to continue to tackle child poverty. I do not think that that is “celebratory”: the statement set out the facts of what we have done.

I do not think that it is a fair representation to say that we are not doing everything that we can. Through the budget for 2022-23, the Scottish Government has allocated almost £3 billion to a range of supports that will help to mitigate the impact on households of the increased cost of living. That includes work to tackle child poverty, to reduce inequalities and to support financial wellbeing, alongside provision of social security payments that are not available anywhere else in the UK. We can see from the resource spending review that social security is where the main bulk of the spend from the Scottish Parliament is. That is the direction of travel of funding.

There is always more to do—I will never disagree with Pam Duncan-Glancy on that—but it would be good, just occasionally, to hear some acknowledgement of the action that has been taken here that has not been taken anywhere else in these islands.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

The cabinet secretary has outlined the amount of support that the Scottish Government is providing to mitigate the impact of the cost of living crisis. She also mentioned social security. Too many people are missing out on UK Government benefits. How can we encourage benefit take-up at Scotland and UK levels?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Ruth Maguire has made an important point. We need to encourage and promote take-up of benefits. Ms Maguire will be aware that we have had a benefit take-up campaign and that we have funded a number of advice workers—as I mentioned in my statement—in order that we can, for example, get to people who are visiting their general practice and make them aware of their entitlements. We are considering what more we can do to ensure that there is easily accessible information and advice about the myriad supports that exist. Information and advice should be available not just about Scottish Government supports but about UK welfare supports and those that are routed through local government.

Work is on-going to promote that so that everybody who is entitled to support gets it. I am happy to keep Ruth Maguire apprised of that work.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Amendments to extend free school meals provision were voted down by the SNP and Greens in the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill. When will the Scottish Government commit to extending free school meals provision beyond P4 and P5 so that we can help to alleviate poverty and make sure that young people do not go hungry?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

This Government has a proud record of expanding free school meals provision as part of the wider action to tackle food insecurity, to cut the cost of the school day and to help to reduce the poverty-related attainment gap.

Scotland’s offer of universal free school meals in P1 to P5 and to children in special schools is the most generous universal offer in the UK. It is far beyond what is offered in England, where the member’s party is in power. We are committed to expanding free school meals provision further. There is money in the budget for capital to expand capacity in school kitchens ahead of roll-out of that expansion. That is in addition to the more than £169 million that has been provided to support provision of free school meals during term time, and nearly £22 million of funding to provide free school meals alternatives to eligible families in the school holidays, regardless of the age of their children.

There is always more to be done, but it would be extremely unfair not to recognise the work that this Government has done on provision of free school meals.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

The cost to families of uniforms is specifically cited in the tackling child poverty delivery plan. How does the Scottish Government intend to raise awareness about the school uniform guidance consultation, which opened recently, and how it fits in and interacts with other investment that the Scottish Government is making to help to deliver the main aims of the plan?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As our progress report sets out, we have invested almost £8.5 billion in support that is targeted at low-income households from 2018 to 2022, of which £3.3 billion has benefited children. We are determined to put money into the pockets of families, as well as to reduce household costs. Of course, that includes the important element of reducing the cost of the school day. That is why we have increased the value of the school clothing grants over the past four years, with a minimum award of £100 per eligible child in 2018, which we have increased to £120 for primary school children and £150 for secondary school children.

We have set out our intention to introduce new guidance on school uniforms, with the aim of reducing costs and ensuring that the money that families have goes further. We are engaging with a wide range of stakeholders and will continue to promote the consultation.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

Child poverty figures

and indeed some of the estimated figures in Scotland highlight the true scale of the problem facing thousands of families across the country. I want to back up my colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy and say that I find those on the Government front bench quite self-congratulatory on this. We need to be much stricter with ourselves in this Parliament in relation to how serious the issue is and we should be talking about the things that need to happen.

The minister has not mentioned the priority groups affected by child poverty. There are far too many children living in poverty in Scotland today, but inequalities mean that disabled children and those from ethnic minority backgrounds or lone-parent families, for example, need extra support, and that has not been addressed. Can the minister set out a clear strategy to support those children and families?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Again, I do not think that that is a fair representation of what I was setting out. The statement is an account of what has been done in the delivery of the first child poverty delivery plan.

All I can do is to set out and report on what we have done, as I am required to do under the 2017 act. Surely, Carol Mochan would be complaining if I was not doing that, as per the requirements under the act. I have tried to set out what we have done. Is there more to do?

Of course, there is more to do. That is why we have committed £3 billion to supporting low-income households. That is an extraordinary investment from a fixed budget with all the inflationary and other pressures on all budgets. In essence, it puts our money where our mouths are.

As I did in my statement, I could list all the things that we are doing that form part of that £3 billion, but we have to strike a balance between members rightly holding us to account—that is what we are here for as ministers in the Government—and, just occasionally, recognising where we are putting the money. On the resource spending review, members have complained about money going to other parts of Government because it is going into supporting social security and tackling child poverty.

On the point about the intersectionality of people with disabilities, disabled children and children from a black or ethnic minority background, they are in the six priority families to which I referred in my statement. Both of the tackling child poverty delivery plans absolutely focus on those six priority families because we know that those families, including lone parents, are more likely to suffer poverty. That is why we have particularly targeted those children through the plan. I hope that Carol Mochan is able to acknowledge that.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

New detailed analysis shows that independent European countries comparable to Scotland are wealthier and fairer than the UK. Poverty rates are lower in those comparator countries and there are fewer children living in poverty. What would be the opportunities if we had those additional powers at our disposal?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

We would have the full levers of a normal Government that other Governments throughout the world have

to tackle child poverty. We would have powers over all elements of social security, employment, tax and, importantly, borrowing powers. At the moment, as we can see through the fiscal framework—this is relevant to our projected social security spend—we do not have the borrowing powers to allow us to smooth out the peaks and troughs of income tax take or social security expenditure that every other Government has. In fact, local government has more powers in that respect than we have.

That is important not as some kind of theoretical discussion but because we would be able to do far more beyond what we can do. I have set out the extensive measures that we are already taking, but we could do far more if we were to move away from a fixed block grant based on what another Government spends and were able to use our resources to better support Scotland’s priorities.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The cabinet secretary contradicts herself: she said that the statement was not self-congratulatory and celebratory before asking Pam Duncan-Glancy for appreciation for the work that she has done. She needs to make up her mind.

I say to the cabinet secretary that 7,500 two-year-olds from disadvantaged backgrounds are not accessing their free 1,140 nursery hours. The take-up rate is terrible. What is she doing about that and when will we see progress?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

To correct Willie Rennie, I did not ask Pam Duncan-Glancy to congratulate the Scottish Government. I asked for a bit of balance between, on the one hand, us saying that there is more to do, that we do not always get everything right and that we want ideas from others and

, on the other,

getting occasional acknowledgement of some of the things that we are doing that are delivering for children living in poverty in Willie Rennie’s constituency as well as elsewhere.

I do not know why Willie Rennie is shaking his head. I have outlined all the measures that we are taking, such as supporting people through the Scottish child payment. I thought that he would welcome the support that is going into the pockets of low-income households in his constituency.

I laid out in my remarks the support that we are giving young people through the roll-out of early learning and childcare. The way that it is being rolled out has supported a number of families.

We have invested roughly £1 billion a year in the delivery of funded ELC, supporting children and their families, and the resource spending review contains assumptions looking at how we build on that. We have also given commitments to build a system of school-age childcare to support families with low incomes and to develop a new offer of learning and childcare for one and two-year-olds. That work is on-going.

I can tell Mr Rennie that the number of eligible two-year-olds accessing funded ELC rose last year to 6,474 children in September 2021—that is an increase of 25 per cent year on year, equating to 1,611 more children accessing their entitlement. There is more to be done, but, again, I hope that that is something that can be welcomed.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I have five members who want to ask questions, so I need to have short questions and short answers.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Under the lifetime of the plan outlined in

“Every child, every chance: The Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2018-22”, the Scottish Government supported many families who were hit by the United Kingdom Government’s cruel benefit cap. Indeed, about 3,100 Scottish households—almost all of them with children—have been negatively impacted by the cap on universal credit alone. Thanks to the Greens working with the Scottish Government, that support will increase over the next four years.

Can the cabinet secretary give us an update on the work that is being done to identify eligible families and get that much-needed support to them and say how we can build on the lessons that have been learned from the welfare advisers’ work to ensure that everyone gets the benefits to which they are entitled?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I called for brief questions and answers. I want to get all members in and, if I do not get brief questions and answers, I will not get everyone in—that is just the way it is.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I will try to be brief, and I will write to Maggie Chapman with more detail.

We are looking at the lessons learned from the advisers and there will be an evaluation of that work, which I can keep Maggie Chapman apprised of.

On the benefit cap, we are consulting local authority partners on the best methodology for delivering that important policy, which will support around 4,000 families once it is rolled out.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Can the cabinet secretary outline what measures the Scottish Government is taking to support parental employment as part of its support for priority families?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Could the member repeat the question? I think that it was on family benefits, but I could not quite hear it.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I am sorry. My question was, what measures is the Scottish Government taking to support parental employment as part of its support for priority families?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Clearly, that is a key plank of the tackling child poverty plan, building on the work that has already been done around employability programmes but making it far more bespoke for families, because we recognise that some families have not found their way to the employability programmes, because of all the barriers in their way. We need to understand what those barriers are. They might be to do with childcare issues or other costs that are prohibitive, and we want to work with families by ensuring that they have a key support worker to work with them to overcome any barriers that are particular to that family, in order to help them get into employment.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

Pupil equity funding is allocated based on free school meals data. Given the known challenges with that measure, particularly in rural communities, will the Scottish Government look again at alternatives?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Oliver Mundell is aware of part of the problem with the data. We rely on free school meal data because that is available through local authorities. He will be aware of the discussions—very productive discussions, I have to say—that are going on with the Department for Work and Pensions in order to ensure that we have the data that we require, not least for the roll-out of the Scottish child payment at the end of the year, so that all children under 16 will be entitled to that payment.

We continue to consider whether there is other data that we can use, but the free school meals data that is available through local authorities is one that we can rely on at the moment.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

Can the cabinet secretary outline how much the Scottish Government is spending to mitigate UK Government policies and say how that impacts on Scotland’s child poverty targets? What assessments has the Scottish Government made of the impact of UK Government welfare reform policies on child poverty in Scotland?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

In my statement, I set out that, if the UK Government reversed the welfare reforms that it has implemented since 2015, that would put an estimated £780 million in the pockets of Scottish households, which would help to lift 30,000 children out of poverty.

To mitigate UK Government policies, we are providing £83 million through discretionary housing payments in 2022-23. Of course, the main policy that we mitigate is the bedroom tax. It takes about £60 million to mitigate it, and that money helps more than 91,000 households sustain their tenancies. That does not help to tackle the issue of temporary accommodation, but we continue to discuss with the DWP how that issue might be resolved at source; in fact, we raised it at our last meeting. I also include £7 million to mitigate the benefit cap, as far as we are able within devolved powers. That will help up to 4,000 families, many of whom are larger or lone parent families.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the ministerial statement. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business.

Social Security (Special Rules for End of Life) Bill

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-05222, in the name of Ben Macpherson, on the Social Security (Special Rules for End of Life) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak button. I call on Ben Macpherson to speak to and move the motion.

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

This legislative consent motion is in response to the UK Government’s Social Security (Special Rules for End of Life) Bill.

I appreciate that the debate was scheduled at short notice. That was due to the UK legislation being progressed rapidly. Given the extent to which the UK bill has been expedited, as well as our Parliament’s upcoming recess, a legislative consent motion is needed to ensure that we align with the UK Government’s approach. That is expected under the terms of the Scottish Government’s agency agreements with the Department for Work and Pensions.

The UK Government’s bill was introduced in the House of Lords on 11 May and serves to change the UK Government’s current definition of terminal illness for the purposes of disability benefits that are administered by the Department for Work and Pensions.

In the DWP system, currently, those who are estimated to have six months or less to live due to terminal illness can have their disability benefit applications fast-tracked, so that they can start receiving their payments more quickly. The UK Government bill will expand that definition of terminally ill to those who have less than 12 months to live, rather than six months. The UK Government expects that change to result in a widening of fast-tracked access to disability benefits for terminally ill people.

Disability living allowance, personal independence payment and attendance allowance are all affected by the UK Government bill. Provision relating to disability benefits falls within devolved competence by virtue of the Scotland Act 2016 and the amendments that the 2016 act made to the devolution settlement. Therefore, the UK Government bill that is in question today relates to devolved matters, which has triggered the requirement for an LCM.

Until we fully implement our Scottish replacements, disability living allowance, personal independence payment and attendance allowance are being delivered by the DWP—on behalf of the Scottish ministers—under an agency agreement, and there is therefore a requirement for those benefits to be administered consistently across the UK until case transfer completes, and our agency agreements with DWP cease.

Of course, adult disability payment, which replaces disability living allowance and personal independence payment in Scotland, is being rolled out in stages and is currently available in six local authority areas. Another seven areas will be added in July for new applications, ahead of full national introduction at the end of August and the on-going case transfer process.

At the point of full roll-out on 29 August, when adult disability payment will be available nationally—this is an important point—anyone in Scotland who becomes terminally ill while in receipt of PIP or DLA will have their entitlement automatically transferred to Social Security Scotland and will benefit from the Scottish definition of terminal illness, which I will come on to shortly.

The UK Government bill will likely have limited impact on those who are currently in receipt of DLA or PIP in Scotland. It will impact people who are in receipt of, or who are applying for, attendance allowance ahead of the introduction of our pension age disability payment, which will replace attendance allowance in due course.

Encouragingly, the UK Government’s bill will bring the new definition of terminal illness in the UK closer to the definition that we have introduced for disability benefits in Scotland, but the UK definition will still be based on a fixed time period with regard to life expectancy. That is in contrast to the Scottish Government definition of terminal illness as part of the delivery of Scottish forms of assistance, including child disability payment and adult disability payment, which is based on clinical judgment that does not include a time limit on life expectancy. That means that people who are approaching the end of their life are more easily able to have their applications processed quickly, but with the Scottish definition.

Given what I have said, I consider a legislative consent motion to be the right course of action in order to maintain alignment with the UK Government’s legislation, as is expected under the terms of our agency agreements. Therefore, providing legislative consent is the most pragmatic and appropriate course of action.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that the provisions of the Social Security (Special Rules for End of Life) Bill, introduced in the House of Lords on 11 May 2022, relating to Special Rules for Terminal Illness for accessing disability benefits, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, should be considered by the UK Parliament.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

It feels a bit like déjà vu, as we had a similar debate on a different social security issue last week. Last week, the minister felt that I was slightly partisan in my comments, so I will try to be more constructive this week.

However, it is worth pointing out, particularly around clause 1 of the bill that is going through Westminster at the moment, that the reason why we are having to debate the issue in relation to DLA, PIP and attendance allowance is that there has been a delay in implementing ADP and other Scottish benefits here in Scotland.

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

Does the member accept that the devolution of social security benefits is a joint programme of work between the Scottish Government and the UK Government, and that the delay to the delivery of some of our devolved benefits has been because both Governments had to reprioritise during the pandemic?

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

I accept that the pandemic has been an important factor in the delay, but even before the pandemic, there were statements in the chamber that those benefits would be delayed anyway. I simply point it out as a factual comment.

The second interesting point is that the UK Government seems to be able to introduce legislation fairly speedily when it is required, and I wonder why it takes the Scottish Government quite so long. In the debate last week, the minister indicted that there simply was not time for a bill to be introduced in this Parliament, yet that does not seem to be the case in Westminster. Therefore, I think that we have to look at the time that such emergency bills require and consider whether we can do it quicker in this Parliament.

My third gentle point to the minister, with due respect, is that, for the record, the definition of terminal illness here in Scotland is not a Scottish Government definition; the definition was agreed to by this Parliament. If I may claim credit, it was my amendment that introduced it, and it was agreed to unanimously by the whole Parliament. I appreciate that the Scottish Government is now implementing and taking forward that definition, but the definition can be owned by all five parties and by all MSPs who were in the Parliament at the time.

I will perhaps be a wee bit more constructive in my final couple of remarks. It has been really helpful for the minister to define exactly where people apply to if, sadly, they get a terminal illness after August. However, my concern about that relates to how we get that information out to those who need it, such as to citizens advice bureaux, advice shops and other third sector organisations, and to the Scottish public more generally, so that everyone knows that we have a new definition, that there is a faster way to access the benefit and that people can get higher levels of care and mobility allowance more quickly if they go through that procedure. I ask the minister when closing to address whether any advertisement of the changes will take place over the summer. If so, how will that happen?

Come decision time, the Conservatives will vote for the motion. We think that the UK Government has taken a positive step forward. I hope that the motion gets the support of every member in the chamber.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Let me start with the substance of the motion and the impact on people. This is about people’s lives and terminal illness—it is possibly the time when we need our Governments to be the most sensitive and responsive. For that reason, the Labour Party welcomes the move to extend the period in which a person who is terminally ill can qualify for special rules for terminal illness exceptions.

I agree with the minister that these matters are to do with legislation over which this Parliament has competence. In fact, as has been said, Social Security Scotland has its own special rules for terminal illness under which there is no qualifying period. I commend the Scottish Government for having a policy that is designed to ensure that people are provided with the support that they need when they need it, and for its diversion from UK Government policy in that regard.

However, I am again a little disappointed, because the people of Scotland are not yet feeling the full benefits of devolved social security. That is not because we need more power in that area, but because the Scottish Government is still letting people down by failing to manage the powers that it already has.

The Parliament passed social security legislation in 2018, yet, more than four years later, only a handful of local authorities have opened applications for the benefits; new applications will not be available to everyone in Scotland until at least 29 August; full transfer of those currently on PIP over to ADP is not expected until 2025; and 313,620 people on PIP have been left at the hands of the DWP, facing delay after delay as a result.

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

We all want to move to the implementation of the benefits as quickly as possible and to full case transfer, but I again pose, in a constructive spirit, these questions to Pam Duncan-Glancy. What are the Labour Party’s suggestions, within the budget constraints of the Parliament and within the technical and human challenges of undertaking these exercises in the execution of Government policy? What would it have done differently to make things happen more quickly? We are going as quickly as we can. I am not hearing any constructive suggestions as to how we could have done things more quickly or how we could do things more quickly in the future.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

That is possibly the first time that I have heard that point about the budget in relation to pace, which is interesting.

We could do a number of things differently in terms of the administration. We also need to work more closely with other Parliaments in the UK. Like my Conservative colleagues, we will support the Scottish Government’s motion. However, the fact that we have a UK Government that does not consider that a legislative consent motion is needed and a Scottish Government that does shows that there is significant confusion.

Those 313,620 people, who have been led up a hill and left waiting for years and years, are now being told to wait longer for substantial change. The same is true of child disability payment. Despite the process for new applications being fully operational here, safe and secure transfer will not happen until 2023. In addition, the SNP-Green Government has not set out a timetable for attendance allowance.

In the meantime, it is no wonder that there is disagreement between the Governments on what they need consent for, because they have been incapable of working together at pace. I say to the minister that we need to work at pace and together. Instead, the UK Government has created a confused system in which powers have been devolved to Scotland and the Scottish Government has sent some back, has asked the DWP to take care of others and has chosen a few on which to make some progress. It is clearly a messy arrangement that is not helping anyone. Frankly, it seems to me that nobody has a clue and that the Scottish people are paying the price. How on earth can the Governments expect people in Scotland to navigate this if they cannot?

We will support today’s motion, but I stress that I would far prefer to spend parliamentary time on social security legislation that would fundamentally and materially improve the lives of the people of Scotland, instead of spending time debating constitutional intricacies that have been caused by delays and confusion, which have left people without the support that they need. It is not good enough that neither Government can get this right. This is the second time in a week that we have faced the same type of motion and the same constitutional tug of war because neither Government is able to establish who has responsibility for what.

I recognise the policy and ideological differences between the SNP Government at Holyrood and the Tory Government at Westminster, but, although social security remains a shared responsibility, it is of the utmost importance that Governments talk to and engage with each other and stop wasting time on disagreements. That is the best chance that we have of getting things right—and doing so quickly—for the people of Scotland.

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

I am grateful to members across the chamber for their time and their contributions to the debate. Although the Scottish Government has taken a very different approach to the UK Government’s in its definition of terminal illness—as decided by the Scottish Parliament—this UK Government bill represents a positive change that will benefit those who are terminally ill and are applying for disability benefits administered by the DWP.

I requested this legislative consent motion because it is required in order for the UK Government to make changes to the definition of terminal illness in Scotland. To be clear to Pam Duncan-Glancy, there is agreement between the Scottish Government and the UK Government on this legislative consent motion. The situation is different from that of the previous legislative consent motion that we considered. In fact, the UK Government formally requested the legislative consent motion that we are considering.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for that clarity. I appreciate it. The confusion has resulted because we face such a confused situation. It is incumbent on all of us to work together and do the best that we can to roll out social security payments as quickly as possible in Scotland.

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

I agree with the spirit of that, and that is certainly how I engage with UK DWP ministers and Scotland Office ministers on the process.

The only alternative to a legislative consent motion would be the introduction of equivalent Scottish primary legislation. However, to take that approach, we would need to have the legislation in place at the same time as the UK bill—which was introduced seven weeks ago—came into force. Given the extent to which the UK bill has been expedited, that would be extremely challenging because of the other pressures on this Parliament’s legislative programme. Without parliamentary approval for the legislative consent motion that we are considering today, those in receipt of, or applying for, DWP disability benefits in Scotland would not be able to take advantage of the widening of the terminal illness definition. I appreciate the member’s point, but I think that the process that we are following is the most practical one in the circumstances.

Pam Duncan-Glancy made a point about speed. I want to be clear that I was in no way insinuating that budget is a factor in delivering the roll-out of new devolved Scottish benefits or in the case transfer process. As a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, Pam Duncan-Glancy will be aware that Social Security Scotland has made it very clear that it could not have gone faster with this process. We have had to ensure the safe and secure delivery of these benefits by creating benefits that have been designed for those with lived experience in mind, and we have undertaken all the stakeholder engagement involved in that process. We have moved at a strong pace to deliver a high-quality service as we continue to undertake the case transfer process and introduce seven benefits that are not available elsewhere in the UK. That is a significant improvement.

Jeremy Balfour raised an important point about awareness. When we deliver new benefits, including through the phases of adult disability payment, we engage with local authorities and stakeholders through our local delivery teams to raise awareness. All of us MSPs can play a really positive role in that process. I will write to all MSPs and Scottish MPs in the coming days to encourage all of us to do what we can through the summer recess to raise awareness of what benefits are available for people, so that they can apply. The Government, of course, does that work on an on-going basis, and it will continue to do so as proactively as it can. However, we can all make a difference, and we should do it together.

It is important that those people who are terminally ill benefit from the change that the UK Government’s definition of terminal illness will create. That includes those people who receive attendance allowance and those adults who will apply for DWP benefits in the short time between the UK Government’s bill coming into force and the end of August, when the adult disability payment will be introduced nationally.

The legislative consent motion that is before us today will ensure the continued delivery of UK Government benefits on our behalf while we continue the safe and secure transfer of people to their respective forms of Scottish assistance.

I thank Parliament for considering the matter, and I look forward to working with colleagues through the summer as we continue to support people who receive disability assistance and to raise awareness of what is available to support people. I hope that Parliament will back the legislative consent motion.