Scottish Parliament, 7 September 2022

256 contributions from 55 members. The official report.

Health and Social Care

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio question time, and the first portfolio is health and social care. If a member wishes to request a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button, or indicate so in the chat function by entering the letter R, during the relevant question.

General Practitioners (Menopause and Perimenopause Training and Development)

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

1. To ask the Scottish Government what specific training and CPD GPs undertake to remain updated on developments in helping women through perimenopause and the menopausal stages of their life. (S6O-01316)

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

Menopause

is included in the Royal College of General Practitioners’ curriculum, in which all general practitioner trainees need to demonstrate competency in order to practise independently as a GP in the United Kingdom.

Training materials and aids are widely available to GPs to ensure that they remain updated on the latest developments in helping women through both the menopause and the perimenopause.

The Scottish Government has recently commissioned NHS Education for Scotland—NES—to create a bespoke training package and framework focused on the menopause and menstrual health for GPs and others who work in primary care.

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

Having spoken to numerous constituents about their concerns and their experience of menopause, I know that their experience has been patchy and inconsistent as regards the information and help that they have been offered. Some have been completely dismissed as being too young to be suffering from perimenopause or have been told that menopause is not a disease and that, therefore, getting through the process until it is unbearable is probably the best course of action.

I could cite numerous examples of very poor outcomes for women who have felt completely dismissed when they have raised the changes that they are experiencing in their lives. Dr Louise Newson, who is a practising GP, had to set up her own menopause clinic because no one seemed to be able to provide the correct treatment for her.

I ask the minister, please, to look at what is being done to advance understanding among GPs in Scotland of what perimenopausal and menopausal women are going through and the care that they need, so that they can get individual person-centred treatment that meets their specific needs.

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

Women have told us loudly and clearly that they do not always get the support that they need when they seek help for menopause symptoms. In fact, that is one of the reasons for my having specific responsibility for women’s health in my portfolio. It is also why, through implementation of “Women’s Health Plan: A Plan for 2021-2024”, we intend to build a basic understanding of menopause among all healthcare professionals. That will include awareness of the symptoms of perimenopause and menopause, and of the intermediate and long-term consequences of menopause, and knowledge of where to signpost women to for consistent advice and support.

In the past year, we have created a menopause specialist network, which meets regularly and supports primary care teams by providing access to a menopause specialist for consistent advice, support, onward referral, leadership and training, so I expect to see improvements.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

It is right that we need to consider all ways of helping women through perimenopause and the menopausal stages of their lives. However, to spearhead the policy and advocacy work in that regard, we must appoint a women’s health champion in Scotland. In June, the First Minister told the Parliament that such an appointment would be made in the summer. Charities are now saying that the deadline has been missed. Has the Scottish Government made an appointment? If not, why not?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I assure Carol Mochan that the appointment process is almost complete, and I expect to be able to make an announcement about the appointee very soon. As I have reiterated many times, that was a medium-term commitment in “Women’s Health Plan”. We have met all our short-term commitments in the plan, and we are making progress on many of the medium-term commitments that we made.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

I want to ask about the accessibility of hormone replacement therapy supplies. While trying to access my own medication, I have faced barrier after barrier and inconsistency after inconsistency. I have seen the protocol, and it is nothing more than a scrap of paper. What action is the Government taking to stop menopausal and perimenopausal women being bounced around the primary care health service, so that they can access the support and treatment that they need in a timely and straightforward manner?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Before I ask the minister to respond to that, I highlight that the question in the

Business Bulletin

relates to “specific training and CPD”. If the minister could respond in that light, that would make Ms Webber’s question supplemental to the question that is in the

Business Bulletin

.

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I am happy to do that. Prescribing guidance to assist prescribers is available from multiple sources, including the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which revised its menopause prescribing guidance in March. That can be found in the usual places and in the clinical knowledge summary online.

Scottish Government ministers and officials are unable to comment on individual cases of prescribing practice, because national health service boards and healthcare professionals locally have responsibility for service delivery and patient treatment. The decision about which treatment to prescribe is made on the basis of an individual clinical decision by the prescriber, taking into account the patient’s condition and medical history.

I wonder whether my colleague Sue Webber is also referring to shortages in HRT, which is a United Kingdom-wide issue. As, I am sure, she is absolutely aware, supply of medicines and associated shortages is reserved to the UK Government. We will continue to work with it to seek a lasting resolution and will press it to work closely with the affected companies, in order to address that particular problem as quickly as possible.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Before we move on to question 2, I make the plea for more succinct questions and answers.

Covid-19 Recovery (Support for Primary Care Services)

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what support it is giving to primary care services as they recover from the Covid-19 pandemic. (S6O-01317)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

We are committed to increasing investment in primary care services as they recover from the pandemic. Priorities include the delivery of extended general practice multidisciplinary teams, to ensure that patients are seen by the right person at the right time. Funding for that has increased from £155 million to £170 million this year, with 3,220 members of multidisciplinary teams already in post.

We are supporting the recovery of national health service dentistry by investing £20 million to allow dentists to see more patients, with a focus on children and on tackling oral health inequalities.

Staff recovery and wellbeing are critical to renewing our NHS, and support includes the national wellbeing hub and a confidential staff helpline.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

Kinghorn surgery in my constituency has now been without a full-time GP for several months. What assistance can the Scottish Government give to resolve that issue and provide reassurance for my constituents?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I am obviously happy to reach out to local health boards and health and social care partnerships. As I have already referenced, there has been significant investment in general practice—in particular, in recruitment. We have a target to increase the number of GPs by 800 by 2027, and we are making good progress, with 277 GPs already recruited. Our GP trainee recruitment fill rate this year was 100 per cent, which is another improvement on last year. That has been very successful indeed.

I will reach out to local stakeholders in relation to the issue that David Torrance has referenced, and I will write to him with an update.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

The lack of specialist clinics, waiting times for surgery, delayed discharge and stagnation of patient flow through hospitals have led to desperate patients turning to GPs, and we are overwhelmed and patients are angry. Support from pharmacies as independent prescribers is vital in order to reduce GP workload. What data does the Government collect that tells us how many subscriptions are done per pharmacy per day to ensure that Government funding is effective, because the Pharmacists’ Defence Association does not believe that it is effective?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I have received correspondence in relation to some of the concerns that have been raised and I have written back to a number of members of the Scottish Parliament.

Pharmacists play an incredibly important role in alleviating the pressures right across the system, whether they are in acute sites, community pharmacies or general practices. With regard to the money that I have just referenced, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians make up a significant proportion of the additional MDT staff who have been recruited. For example, if we look at the number for whole-time-equivalent pharmacy technicians in our GP practices, we see that the number recruited was 38.3 in 2018, compared with the number that we now have in 2022.

On the question about prescriptions, I will look into the matter and write to the member with more detail.

I record my thanks to our pharmacists up and down the country, whatever setting they are in, for the incredible work that they do to alleviate the pressure on our NHS and social care system.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I am glad that the cabinet secretary recognises the importance of pharmacists. It is worrying to see the growth in pharmacy closures and the impact of those closures on carers and patients.

The Pharmacists’ Defence Association has highlighted how the owners of pharmacies are all able to claim non-activity-based payments after closure, which enables some of them to enhance their profitability at the expense of patient safety.

Will the cabinet secretary set out the range of actions that health boards can take to deal with closures, given that the current arrangements have failed to stop them? Does he intend to provide for additional action to discourage further closures?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

If memory serves me correctly—I will correct the record if I am wrong, of course—I have written to Jackie Baillie on that point, because she has written to me about the concerns that she and

Dr Sandesh Gulhane have raised today. In my letter, I referenced the fact that closures are very few—although that is not to say that they do not have an impact. Even if they are few, they might well have an impact.

It is for local health boards to look at the contracts that they have for pharmacy provision. If anyone is in breach of those contracts, action can be taken.

In addition, a number of asks have come from members. I think that in my letter of response to Jackie Baillie I said that I would look at those asks and update Parliament in due course.

General Practice (Patient Satisfaction)

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the findings of the health and care experience survey 2021-22 in relation to patient satisfaction with GP services. (S6O-01318)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Any reduction in patient experience is regrettable, but I hope that the context of that particular survey is well understood. I am certain that it is understood by Ms Villalba and members throughout the Parliament. That context is, of course, the pandemic. Guidance

was issued to GP practices not to treat patients face to face unless that was clinically necessary; social distancing was introduced in practices; and, although there were more remote consultations, electronic booking systems were used less, as existing systems could not screen for Covid-19 symptoms.

We will continue to invest in GP practices. We want people to have access to those services at similar levels to those that existed pre-pandemic. The health and care experience survey is a vital tool for us, in that it gets us direct feedback from patients across the country.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

The health and care experience survey results show that patients are dissatisfied with GP services at medical practices that were put out to tender in Aberdeen earlier this year. I have shared

with the cabinet secretary

the testimonies of patients at

Old Aberdeen medical practice. In a letter to me today, the cabinet secretary said that his officials have communicated his

“expectation that GP practice contract monitoring should resume in Aberdeen as soon as is practically possible”.

However, what about the declining standards that have been reported in recent months? Will the cabinet secretary request that NHS Grampian sets out a plan to address the issues that have already been identified by patients such as those at Old Aberdeen?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Ms Villalba raises a fair point. Some of the scores in the health and care experience survey, for example for the Newburn practice, were far from acceptable.

Some scores were far below the Scottish average. We have to recognise, too, that some were above the Scottish average. However, scores in relation to accessibility and the ability to get an appointment within three working days were particularly low.

I will ask my officials to reach out to local partners to determine the improvement plan that those practices will put in place, to give reassurance about the actions that will be taken to improve the patient experience.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that much patient frustration lies with the often opaque appointment systems that some GP practices use? I have heard of ill constituents calling 100 to 150 times to get through to some practices, if they got through at all.

What steps can the Scottish Government take to ensure that systems whereby folk know that they are in a telephone queue are implemented as standard?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Kenny Gibson makes a good point. There is no doubt that a lot of the understandable frustration of members of the public comes from when they have to phone up a general practice, because whether they get through is a game of Russian roulette. I hope that that happens only in a minority of cases—I do not doubt that it is the minority—but I take what the member says on board. I had a discussion this morning about the fact that every general practice should have in place pre-bookable appointments. I accept what Kenny Gibson says and am happy to keep him and other members up to date as we progress the matter.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There is a supplementary question from Tess White.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Friockheim health centre in Angus

got a 95.46 per cent positive score in the health and care experience survey, which was the highest score across Tayside. However, difficulties in recruiting GPs to the surgery meant that it closed earlier this year, which moved 3,000 patients elsewhere. That was another huge blow for rural patient care.

The Scottish Government committed to a £20,000 golden hello to help to fill rural vacancies. Why is that not working?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

There were particular issues with that practice, which were raised with me by the constituency MSP at the time. It is right that such matters are taken forward at local level.

The member is correct that we have a number of incentives in place to make general practices in rural and remote areas more attractive, such as the golden hello scheme, the GP speciality training bursary and the Scottish graduate entry medicine programme, the first cohort of which has just graduated. I hope that all those incentives, taken together with the work that we are doing on the back of Sir Lewis Ritchie’s report, will encourage more and more doctors and GPs to take up roles in remote, rural and island communities.

Alcohol-related Deaths

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the latest alcohol-related deaths statistics. (S6O-01319)

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

Nobody should die as a result of alcohol consumption, and my thoughts go out to all people who have been affected by alcohol harm. We work with various organisations across Scotland, including alcohol and drug partnerships, to address the issue. That work includes piloting an innovative managed-alcohol programme in partnership with the Simon Community Scotland, commissioning Public Health Scotland to review alcohol brief interventions, consulting on a range of potential alcohol marketing restrictions in Scotland and fully evaluating minimum unit pricing.

We support the principles of the right to recovery, which will be embedded in the national care service to enable everyone to access the treatment that they need.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I echo the minister’s comments: every loss of life is tragic, be it to drugs or alcohol.

Alcohol-related deaths are Scotland’s second national shame, alongside our drugs crisis. Audit Scotland is clear about the scale of the cuts that were made as far back as 2014 to front-line alcohol services. That is why the number of alcohol deaths in my region is up by 10 per cent in the past four years, and it is why someone is 5.6 times more likely to die from alcohol-related disease if they live in a deprived area.

I make a plea to the minister and all Government ministers to listen to people on the front line who are in desperate need of support. They need help but, for far too many, it is simply not there. Will the Scottish Government double down—and I really mean double down—on its efforts to tackle alcohol-related problems in society and to properly fund and resource those efforts, given their notable absence in yesterday’s programme for government?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I absolutely agree that alcohol and drug-related harms are very important public health issues in Scotland. That is why we established the national mission to improve and save lives. At the core of that is ensuring that every individual is able to access the treatment and the recovery that they choose.

Tackling alcohol-related harms is a priority for the Scottish Government. Our alcohol and drugs teams work closely with each other and share knowledge of what works in reducing the impact of addiction, as well as in relation to routes through to treatment. The number of alcohol-related and alcohol-specific deaths, as the member says, are disproportionately higher in deprived communities, which is why we continue to take a whole-population approach when it comes to reducing alcohol consumption and the risk of alcohol-related harms. That, in turn, will drive reductions in alcohol harm in our most deprived communities. We are also taking action to improve the conditions that drive alcohol harms by reducing poverty and inequalities, providing good-quality affordable housing and enabling the best start in life for our children.

However, I have to say that it often feels as though we are working with one hand tied behind our back. We give with one hand and the United Kingdom Government takes with the other.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There is a supplementary question from Monica Lennon.

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

In the light of this tragic public health emergency, does the Government intend to introduce an alcohol harm prevention levy on alcohol retailers to help to fund alcohol prevention activity and much-needed support services?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

As I have said before, I am willing to consider all suggestions on how to tackle alcohol-related harm. The workstreams that we have at the moment are many and extensive, and I expect to deliver results.

I look forward to seeing the evaluation on minimum unit pricing, which, when the Parliament reviews whether the policy should be continued, will

be the most extensively studied policy that we have ever passed in this Parliament

, I think

. At the same time, we will look at whether we have an appropriate minimum unit price. The legislation was introduced more than a decade ago, so it is timely that we review the minimum unit price.

We are considering alcohol brief interventions. Those conversations might help people to open up, consider and understand that they have an alcohol problem. We are considering how they can be used most appropriately and how we can maximise their impact.

As figures show, we still have a profoundly unhealthy relationship with alcohol in Scotland. We need to shift that culture, and tackling alcohol advertising will be part of that.

National Treatment Centres (NHS Tayside and NHS Fife)

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

5. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the proposed national treatment centres for NHS Tayside and NHS Fife. (S6O-01320)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The NHS Fife national treatment centre is a £33 million project that will see the creation of a state-of-the-art facility hosting three operating theatres, a supporting in-patient ward and associated out-patient facilities. Construction at the site began in March 2021 and it is well under way. Assuming that there are no unavoidable delays, the project is on course to complete construction in October 2022, and the first patients will be treated in January 2023.

The business case for NHS Tayside national treatment centre is under development. Following a project pause in March 2020, during the pandemic, the proposals are being refreshed to meet current and future demand and to ensure that they meet our net zero carbon ambitions. An update on the opening date will be provided in due course.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s response. We are still in a situation in which one in nine Scots waits more than a year to receive essential treatment, and they need hope that things are going to change. Will the cabinet secretary clarify what the focus of the treatment centres in Tayside and Fife will be and will he estimate the impact that the centres will have on tackling the backlog of elective surgeries and procedures? Will he also comment on how staff capacity can effectively support the delivery of the specialist services as the centres become operational?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Those points were well made by Mark Ruskell. I cannot overstate just how important and critical national treatment centres are in helping us with the backlog. The member knows that the NTC programme was announced pre-pandemic, and it was important to get through a challenging position that has been exacerbated by the effects of the pandemic. The centres are vital.

The treatment centres will be national so, although those who are local to Fife and Tayside will, of course, benefit, the centres will also be able to help and provide mutual aid to other parts of the country.

National treatment centres are important both for the locality that they are in and nationally.

Staffing for the Fife centre, in particular, is well under way. There are no signalled issues or concerns about staffing the NTC, but I am sure that the member will appreciate that it will be phased as the NTC opens and becomes fully operational.

General Practitioner Pensions (British Medical Association Guidance)

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the British Medical Association regarding the impact in Scotland of its guidance advising general practitioners to consider reducing their pensionable pay or retiring early due to changes in inflation and the way those are used in calculations around GP pensions that reportedly leaves them liable for significant tax charges. (S6O-01321)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Members will be aware that the majority of the pension issues that have been raised are reserved. I have not had the opportunity to meet my health counterpart in the new United Kingdom Government, but I have raised those issues before and I have seen no flexibility in its position.

The Scottish Government and I have regular engagement with the British Medical Association, and the ways in which pension arrangements affect general practitioners and national health service employees, both directly and via the NHS pension scheme, have been raised with me. I have an introductory meeting with the new chair of the BMA later this month, when I am certain that the issues raised by the member will once again be on the agenda.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Along with other MSPs from across the chamber, I recently met the leadership of the local medical committee who represent GPs and their practices in the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde area.

During that meeting, they highlighted the long-standing issues around pensions and how those issues are leading to some GPs considering leaving the profession early or reducing their working hours to avoid what the BMA has claimed amounts to a “pension theft”.

As our NHS continues to contend with the impact of the pandemic, does the cabinet secretary agree with me that it is vital that the UK Government considers changes to the tax-free annual allowance charges so that more GPs are not faced with this dilemma, which will only exacerbate the staffing issues facing general practice?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I agree whole-heartedly and, as I have said before, I have raised this issue with UK counterparts. There has been no flexibility in their position. There are actions that we may well be able to take but, again, that would involve taking money from other areas in the health budget to try to mitigate a problem that the UK Government is showing inflexibility on.

I will call on the UK Government to look at these issues—I look forward to the first meeting with the new Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, which I am sure will happen in very short order, and I will raise those issues with her again. I am sure that the Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, will continue to convey to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury our displeasure at the pension changes, which have caused such difficulty for GPs and doctors right across the country.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The health secretary has the power to sort this. He could use recycling of pension contributions, which the BMA has put to him. That is available in Wales and in many parts of England, and Northern Ireland is looking at it. Why is he refusing to go down that route? It could release doctors back into the NHS to be deployed where they are needed. Why is he not doing that?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I am not refusing to do it. It is actively under consideration. However, it would be preferable to deal with the root cause of the pensions issue as opposed to taking money out of other parts of the Scottish health budget. I am therefore pushing the UK Government to make changes to pensions where it can, which would help to alleviate some of that pressure.

I am very open to looking at a recycling of employer contributions scheme—I know that a REC scheme has been available—and that is why I will be meeting Dr Kennedy, the chair of the BMA, later this month. I will of course provide an update to members in due course.

NHS Orkney (Meetings)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

7. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met NHS Orkney and what issues were discussed. (S6O-01322)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I met the board’s chief executive and other senior staff when I visited NHS Orkney on 16 and 17 August.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I have been contacted this week by a local general practitioner in Orkney confirming that rising heating costs will cause significant implications for the health of his patients. He explains that

“stress caused by financial hardship will adversely affect mental health, and folk turning heating down or off will have negative physical impacts on health. This will create more ill health and further increase NHS workload”.

Although we clearly need urgent action from the new Prime Minister to address the cost of energy crisis, can the health secretary advise what additional support is being made available to NHS Orkney and other health boards to help deal with the increased workload and health impacts referred to by my constituent?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Liam McArthur is of course right—the cost of living crisis is a public health crisis. If people have to choose between heating and eating, either choice that they make will have a detrimental impact on their health. He is also right to make the point that our hospitals, our primary care services and our social care services will feel the pinch because of the rising cost of inflation and, indeed, of energy bills.

As the First Minister outlined yesterday in the programme for government, we are providing support to the public, particularly those who will be hit the hardest—I will not rehearse them due to the need for brevity, but I will say that meaningful action on this remains in the hands of the United Kingdom Government. Therefore, we urge the new Prime Minister and the new Chancellor of the Exchequer to come forward with meaningful measures that will make a significant difference in the face of rising energy prices, because only they have the powers to freeze or to cap those energy price rises. I will continue my engagement with NHS Orkney and other health boards in that regard.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I can squeeze in question 8 if I have succinct questions and answers.

Health Practitioner and General Practitioner Vacancies (Aberdeenshire)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

8. To ask the Scottish Government how it is assisting general practitioner practices in Aberdeenshire to fill vacant GP and health practitioner posts. (S6O-01323)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The Scottish Government offers a wide range of initiatives specifically to attract GPs to rural areas such as Aberdeenshire. That

includes golden hellos and bursaries for newly qualified GPs to take up posts in hard-to-fill rural locations. Our new ScotGem—Scottish graduate entry medicine—programme, focusing on general practice and rural working, is proving popular, with the first cohort of 44 students graduating earlier this year from the University of Dundee and the University of St Andrews.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The situation in my constituency is becoming critical, with Fyvie Oldmeldrum medical group down to two part-time GPs. The practice has received no applications for repeated GP post advertisements over the past couple of years. Mintlaw group practice has had to be taken back under the control of NHS Grampian, with Central Buchan medical practice behind it.

The cabinet secretary has already mentioned incentives, but is the Government considering developing any new, inventive schemes that can further incentivise GPs who have left general practice to return to it or incentivise new graduates to base themselves in rural areas such as mine?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I will ask my officials to reach out to colleagues in the health and social care partnership in Aberdeenshire and in NHS Grampian about the specific issues that Ms Martin has raised.

We have a range of initiatives. The ScotGem programme is still in its early days, but I have no doubt that it will make a big, significant difference to the vacancies that exist in GP practices in remote, rural and island communities. I will ask my officials to reach out to local partners on the specifics and to provide an update to Ms Martin in due course.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes portfolio questions on health and social care. We will now move to portfolio questions on social justice, housing and local government. There will be a brief pause to allow members to change their seats before we move on to the next item of business.

Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We now move to portfolio questions on social justice, housing and local government. If any member wishes to request a supplementary, they should press their request-to-speak button or enter the letter R in the chat function during the relevant question.

Single Building Assessment Programme (Cladding Removal)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will confirm when actions to remove cladding from properties identified as dangerous under the single building assessment programme will be completed. (S6O-01324)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

We are taking priority action to address cladding safety issues, having expanded our single building assessment programme, which determines the safety risk from cladding systems on domestic blocks of flats, from 26 to around 100 buildings. We expect the vast majority of buildings that will be assessed to be found to be safe and we will continue to prioritise higher-risk buildings. If cladding is assessed to be high risk, home owners will be invited to discuss the assessment and to agree to actions that will be required to make their building safe. We are working on agreeing the Scottish safer buildings accord, with the expectation that developers will take responsibility for remediating their buildings.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

My constituents in Glasgow Kelvin can be reassured that those projects have continued at pace.

When announcing the Scottish safer buildings accord in May, the cabinet secretary underlined that a joint and collaborative approach was key to resolving the issue of unsafe cladding. Could she provide an update on how the accord has been received by partners across the sector?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Yes, I can. We are working closely with our partners as we bring together all the stages of the accord’s design. Our collaborative approach, through engagement and information sharing, will create a unique and complex agreement. Homes for Scotland, our key partner and the representative body of the developer sector, strengthens the approach and is important in bringing sectoral understanding and responsibilities to unlocking and resolving the issue of unsafe cladding for home owners in multiresidential buildings across Scotland.

I will keep the Parliament informed when the accord is finalised.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

A series of freedom of information requests has indicated that 88 school buildings in Scotland still have flammable cladding that is the same as or similar to Grenfell Tower’s cladding. Does the cabinet secretary think that it is acceptable to put lives at risk by delaying the removal of that dangerous cladding? When will it be removed from all school buildings in Scotland?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As Jeremy Balfour will understand, it is the statutory responsibility of local authorities to manage and maintain their school estate, and we expect local authorities to deliver a safe environment for all school users.

The responses that were gathered from local authorities post-Grenfell show that there was not a large-scale problem across the school estate in Scotland, and the Deputy First Minister wrote to local authorities to request assurance that the school estate was considered safe in terms of fire safety, and assurances were provided by all 32 local authorities.

Jeremy Balfour will also understand that the focus of the Scottish Government, as is the case in England and Wales, has been on those residential blocks where people are living that have unsafe cladding, because those are the buildings that present the highest risk. That is not just our opinion; that is the expert opinion. That is why we focused our attention on tackling those residential buildings and providing the funding to do so, so that we play our part in resolving those cladding issues as soon as possible.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

There are hundreds of buildings in Scotland with highly combustible high-pressure laminate on them—schools, colleges, universities, private schools, hospitals, prisons, hotels and care homes as well as houses. Minutes of the building and safety working group said that, following the pilot of 26 building assessments, a further 100 will be done in the course of the year. However, only one high-rise building in Glasgow is known to have been assessed this year, in May. Given the scale of the problem across Scotland, does the Scottish Government recognise that much more action is urgently required to address it? Can the cabinet secretary advise how many buildings in Glasgow are believed to be affected, particularly given that the Scottish Government office at Atlantic Quay in Glasgow was recently revealed to be one such building?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Like Jeremy Balfour, Pam Duncan-Glancy is conflating two different issues. One is about residential buildings where there are people living. Those are the buildings that represent the highest risk and they have been the focus of our attention, as has been the case on the part of the Welsh Government and the United Kingdom Government. That is what we are all doing and that is the right thing to do. Of course, we have committed £400 million in order to take that forward. The accord will help with that, because it will mean that, in the case of those buildings that can be assigned to a developer, the developer will remediate the building and resource that work. That means that we will be able to focus our resources on those buildings that have no developer associated with them. We are focusing our attention on those 100 buildings.

The other buildings that Pam Duncan-Glancy refers to are public buildings such as hospitals and schools, and we would expect the relevant organisations—health boards and local authorities, in those cases—to take the lead in making sure that their buildings are safe. She will be aware of the issues that are being looked at in relation to the Queen Elizabeth hospital at the moment. That is the right and proper way to go about these things. The issues are complex but the approach that I have laid out is the right one.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Questions 2 and 3 have not been lodged.

Inflation, Energy Prices and Interest Rates (Impact on Household Costs)

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

4. To ask the Scottish Government what impact inflation, energy prices and interest rates are having on housing costs in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale. (S6O-01327)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The impacts of the cost of living crisis are being felt by all households in Scotland, including in Christine Grahame’s constituency, and are disproportionately affecting people on the lowest incomes, including renters and those without fixed-rate mortgages.

The key levers for tackling the crisis remain in the hands of the United Kingdom Government, and, of course, it must act now. However, our programme for government, which was set out yesterday, contains the steps that we are taking within our limited powers. We are investing an additional £5 million in discretionary housing payments and are extending the scope of the tenant grant fund. We are also introducing rent controls to strengthen tenants’ rights, and a temporary moratorium on evictions.

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

I welcome the announcement in the statement yesterday of emergency legislation to freeze rents across the private and social rented sector.

I have many constituents in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale who are concerned about mortgage payments as interest rates rise. What interventions—if any, given that a lot of this is reserved—are open to the Scottish Government to assist them?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I welcome Christine Grahame’s identification of the emergency legislation as a significant intervention. She raises an important point about people who have mortgages and are struggling. Although it does not apply to all mortgage holders, a support fund that provides the ability to convert a mortgage to rent or shared equity is available for people who are on low incomes and are struggling. We are reviewing that at the moment to see whether we can make the fund more available to support people. Lenders and advice agencies are aware of that, but I am happy to write to Christine Grahame with that information.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

House prices are rising at a faster rate in rural areas. Last year, they increased by 13.5 per cent in the Borders alone

, as more people seek a rural lifestyle post-pandemic. South of Scotland Enterprise has identified that lack of affordable housing as the biggest barrier to attracting the workforce that we need in the area. Does the cabinet secretary accept that the Government needs to review the target that equates to just 10 per cent of new affordable homes being built in rural communities? That demand will continue to outstrip supply, which will further drive up housing costs and prices.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

We have been focusing very much on the needs of housing in rural and remote Scotland. That is why we are bringing forward a plan that will address the needs in rural and remote Scotland. We are looking at some of the barriers to and timelines involved in getting a housing development off the ground and how we can remove some of those barriers. We are making significant investment in the affordable housing supply programme and, over this parliamentary session, we will invest £3.6 billion in order to deliver 110,000 affordable homes by 2032, many of which will be in Colin Smyth’s area. We will continue to do that, but we are always looking at ways in which we can make that money go further, by working with local partners to make sure that we deliver as many affordable homes as possible across all of Scotland.

Refugee Accommodation (Support for Local Authorities)

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what further support it will provide to local authorities for the provision of accommodation for refugees in Scotland, in light of reports that suitable housing has been significantly reduced as a result of its supersponsor scheme. (S6O-01328)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The immigration and asylum systems are fully reserved to the United Kingdom Government. Although local authorities continue to support resettlement schemes by offering accommodation and support in their areas, the Home Office is responsible for the design and operation of resettlement schemes and the UK asylum system.

Refugees who have been granted status following an asylum application have the same rights to access housing as anyone who is legally resident in Scotland.

Since the Ukraine war, under our supersponsor scheme, to ensure that displaced people can travel here safely and immediately, the Scottish Government has directly provided accommodation and support. We have also made £11.2 million available to local authorities to support that work.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but it is clear that the houses are not there. Aberdeen City Council’s previous administration launched the city’s largest council house building programme in decades. Last month, with the Scottish National Party leader citing budget pressures, the new SNP-Lib Dem administration froze four big developments that would have delivered more than 500 new council homes in the city. Will the SNP-Green devolved Government get its act together, give Aberdeen a fair share of funding and allow Aberdeen to build the required new council homes that could be used to welcome people to the granite city?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I do not think that the Tories are on strong ground when talking about council houses, given the sell-off of tens of thousands of them on their watch over the past few years.

Let us look at the situation in Aberdeen. I have provided all local authorities with the assurance over five years of the affordable housing supply programme investment. We expect all local authorities to come forward with their local housing plans in order to meet local need.

Douglas Lumsden linked that question with the issue of Ukraine. Aberdeen City Council has been working extremely hard on proposals to help with the settlement of Ukrainian refugees. If he had better communication with his local authority, he would know about some of those very important plans. I suggest that he get in touch with the local authority and bring himself up to speed.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is somewhat ironic that, while the Scottish Government is doing everything that it can to support refugees by taking 18 per cent of the Ukrainian refugees in the UK, the UK Tory Government is hell-bent on flying other asylum seekers out to Rwanda, to deter them from settling here?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The irony never ceases to amaze me, and Stuart McMillan makes a very important point.

With the “New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy”, we are doing what we can to support people to settle and integrate. As the First Minister set out yesterday, and as the Deputy First Minister also said, under the Ukraine programme, almost 16,000 people have arrived with a Scottish sponsor in Scotland, which represents 18 per cent of all UK arrivals and is the most per head of any of the four nations. If only other countries could step up to the mark as well.

Building Standards (Price of New Homes)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what analysis it has done on the potential impact on the sale price of new homes of its proposal to introduce new building standards to prohibit the use of direct emissions heating systems in new builds from 2024. (S6O-01329)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I refer the member to the answer to written parliamentary question S6W-10120, which was provided on 25 August this year. The research cited found that the cost of installing a zero-emissions heating system ranged from £2,000 to £5,000 more than the cost of installing a gas boiler. However, those costs are highly variable—they depend on a range of factors—and they do not represent predictions of the costs after the 2024 change.

The sale price of a new building is determined by individual developers, and it takes account of a wide range of variables related to building construction costs and local housing markets. Typically, heating system installation costs have a smaller impact on prices than other factors do.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I, too, will refer to that parliamentary answer—which did not answer my question, rather like the answer that the minister has just given. In the written answer, the minister admitted to me that, from 2024, installing zero-direct-emissions heating systems will cost up to £5,000 more per home. In 2019-20, the most recent year before the pandemic intervened, the private sector built more than 16,000 new homes. If Mr Harvie’s rule had been in place, up to £82 million would have been added to construction costs.

What impact does the minister think that adding £82 million to construction costs will have on families’ and first-time buyers’ ability to afford a new home?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I am sorry that Mr Kerr chose not to listen to the answer that I gave, in which I explicitly said that I was not making a prediction about what the cost of zero-emissions heating systems would be after 2024. He suggested that I made that prediction, but I did not.

Everybody in the industry is clear that we need to scale up not only the production of the kit—many of the valuable jobs involving that work will be located in Scotland—but the capacity of the industry to carry out those installations. We are working with the industry to build that capacity, which is expected to reduce the costs over time.

All political parties have committed very clearly to the legally binding climate targets, which cannot be met without ambitious action on zero-emissions heating. I wish, for goodness’ sake, that the Conservative Party would start to get behind the actions that the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that we not only hit those climate targets but do so in a way that benefits the cost of living and the economy in Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I hope to be able to call both questions 7 and 8, but I need to have succinct questions and answers.

Housing Waiting Lists

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how many houses it estimates need to be built to tackle the current housing waiting lists in Scotland. (S6O-01330)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

We have committed to delivering 110,000 affordable homes by 2032, of which at least 70 per cent will be available for social rent and 10 per cent will be in remote, rural and island communities. In this parliamentary term, we will invest £3.6 billion towards the delivery of more affordable homes across Scotland, with £30 million of that investment supporting the continuation of the rural and islands housing fund.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The number of children who are trapped in temporary accommodation in Scotland is up 17 per cent in one year and is at the highest level on record. Families in the central belt are being offered housing in the north of England because of the lack of housing in Scotland. According to Shelter Scotland, 130,000 households are on waiting lists for social homes. Shelter has written to the First Minister, calling for an emergency action plan that will buy and build 38,500 social homes by 2026. Will the Government make housing a national priority? Will it bring forward a costed national emergency plan, so that we can address that unacceptable blight on our country? That makes economic sense and it is the right thing to do.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Affordable housing is a national priority with £3.6 billion allocated to it during this session of Parliament. That is a very clear commitment on our part to build more affordable homes.

Alex Rowley, who raises the important issue of temporary accommodation, mentioned Shelter, which has accepted my request to head up an expert group to look at further solutions to tackle temporary accommodation. He is absolutely right in saying that too many families, particularly those with children, are in temporary accommodation. That is one of my key areas to target, and Shelter will help us to do that work.

I should point out that 20 of the 32 local authorities have managed to reduce the number of people in temporary accommodation since last year. However, more work is to be done to reduce that number, and that is exactly what we are determined to do.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We have to move directly to question 8, because we are running out of time. I ask for brief questions and answers.

Children in Temporary Accommodation

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the increase in the number of children in temporary accommodation, as reported in the annual homelessness in Scotland statistics. (S6O-01331)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As I have just said,

I am very concerned by that increase. I am aware that the impacts of the pandemic are still being felt by local authorities and that they are also facing challenges in meeting some households’ needs, which is reflected in a backlog of households waiting for settled homes. However, the figures are unacceptable.

I have discussed solutions to temporary accommodation pressures with housing conveners, and I have asked an expert group that is chaired by Shelter Scotland and the Association of Local Authority Chief Housing Officers for an action plan to reduce the number of households in temporary accommodation. I expect the initial recommendations to be delivered by the end of the year.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Empty properties that are left in disrepair are a blight on neighbourhoods and could provide much-needed homes to families and children on waiting lists. Will the cabinet secretary provide an update on the progress on compulsory sales orders? Will the Scottish Government consider the proposal for compulsory rental orders?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Ruth Maguire makes an important point. We are committed to modernising the compulsory purchase order process, to make it clearer, fairer and faster for all parties and to support the delivery of projects that are in the public interest. Compulsory sales orders are being considered as part of that. Any new powers would, of course, need to be compliant with the European convention on human rights. Compatibility with existing powers also needs to be carefully considered. That includes any proposals for compulsory rental orders. I am happy to keep the member updated on progress.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes portfolio questions. There will be a very short pause before we move on to the next item of business.

Public Sector Pay and Emergency Budget Review

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by John Swinney on public sector pay and the emergency budget review update. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of this statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The cost of living crisis represents an unprecedented challenge. Families face a winter when they cannot afford to heat their homes, businesses face energy bills that they cannot pay and parents are struggling to feed their children. That is the reality of the crisis.

Although we are a long way from the full effects being known, last month, the Bank of England set out the reality that the United Kingdom is facing a recession as deep as that in the 1990s and as long as that following the 2008 financial crash.

That is the context within which the First Minister set out the programme for government. She confirmed that we will extend and increase the child payment in November and that we will protect the roofs over people’s heads with a rent freeze and a moratorium on evictions. Free school meals will be rolled out further, the fuel insecurity fund will be doubled, rail fares will be frozen until at least March and the warmer homes fuel poverty programme is being widened. That all comes on top of the almost £3 billion in support that is already budgeted for, and an existing £800 million of reliefs for business in this financial year.

The UK Government holds reserved powers over energy, tax, the bulk of benefits and business support, and over regulation that could help to address the crisis. The UK Government has borrowing powers and the ability to deploy financial instruments that can transform household and business budgets. It has all that, yet, as the crisis has worsened, no substantive action has been taken to help people and business. Urgent action is overdue, so I urge the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to waste another day before setting out their plans.

Today, I will update Parliament on the impact of the cost crisis on the public finances, and the steps that we will take to keep them in balance while funding the support that is in our power to provide. The crisis is not just a cost of living crisis, as some characterise it. The costs of doing business, of third sector support and of public services are all rising as well. Indeed, in all my experience, now and during my previous tenure as finance secretary, there has never been a time of greater pressure on the public finances.

Our budget was based on a UK spending review that simply did not foresee the levels of inflation that are now a reality. Last summer, inflation was just 2 per cent. In December, when the budget was agreed, consumer price index inflation stood at just 5.4 per cent. Now, it is more than 10 per cent and is predicted to go higher still. The result is simple: almost every cost that the Government incurs has risen. At the same time, our budget is now worth around £1.7 billion less than it was worth in December.

That alone would require the budget to be revisited, but in times of crisis the job of the finance secretary is not simply to balance the books; it is also to find the money to help families, to back business and to fund the priority projects that improve lives for the long term. Therefore, the emergency budget review must both identify funding to cope with inflation-driven cost increases and aim to support those who most need our help during the crisis.

The review must do so using only the fixed powers of the Parliament. Our total budget is fixed. We cannot vary income tax in-year. Our reserve funding is fully allocated. We have no legal ability to borrow to fund day-to-day spending on things such as pay increases. Our capital borrowing is allocated for projects such as new schools and housing projects that are supporting employment and investing in our recovery. In short, the Scottish budget is at the absolute limits of affordability.

Today, I will set out to Parliament the initial steps that the Scottish Government has taken, and steps that it will take, to manage the nation’s finances while maximising the support that we make available to help those who are in need. First, let me quantify the demand arising from public sector pay. As the First Minister set out to Parliament yesterday, in the midst of a cost crisis, our role in pay negotiations is to maximise the support to the lowest paid as a crucial part of our response to the crisis. My job is not to fight low-paid workers’ pay claims; it is to fund those pay claims. Accordingly, we have seen police officers agree a 5 per cent deal, while in ScotRail, the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen has similarly settled at 5 per cent.

Negotiations with some of the largest workforces, including the national health service agenda for change workforce, are on-going, but the enhanced pay offers that have been made, excluding direct local government contributions, total approximately £700 million. Last week, we also reached a proposed local government pay settlement. As a result of our intervention and the hard work of the unions and their members, the pay rise that is proposed for the lowest paid was significantly increased, with awards in excess of 10 per cent, while the increases for the most well-off were capped at £3,000. That is more money for the lowest paid, funded by the Scottish Government.

The proposed settlement means, however, that we must find additional savings. We said that there was no more money, and there is not. Funding the agreement means taking money from elsewhere.

Pay is not the only cost pressure that we face. We have rightly given a warm Scottish welcome to people who have been displaced from Ukraine as a result of the illegal and on-going Russian invasion. Almost 18 per cent of all displaced Ukrainians coming to the United Kingdom are coming to Scotland. That requires us to find around £200 million, which was not planned for at the time of the budget, just as the invasion began. I hope that no one in the chamber begrudges that support.

Public sector pay and the cost of supporting displaced Ukrainians, along with the rising costs due to inflation, are therefore placing enormous strain on our budget. In addition to those factors, we have a clear determination to support those who will find themselves in difficulty this winter. We have already provided almost £3 billion of support to people and, as the First Minister set out yesterday, we will go further. I have heard and am listening to proposals for further action. We are doubling bridging payments, freezing rail fares until beyond March, giving more help for energy efficiency, providing greater support for businesses and the third sector, and managing the impact of rising energy and food bills on hospitals and schools. None of that can be done without reducing planned spend in other areas and in other programmes.

Difficult choices must be made. There is no unallocated cash. There is no reserve that has not been utilised. Every penny more spent on one policy is a penny less spent on another policy. I have therefore written to the Finance and Public Administration Committee today, setting out around £500 million in reductions in planned spending and forecasting that we have made in recent weeks. Those include a reduction of £53 million in the budget for employability schemes. They include utilising funding of £56 million that has been generated by the ScotWind clearing process—funding that will be reinstated in future years and used, as planned, to invest in the just transition. The reductions include a £33 million deferral of ring-fenced agriculture funds, to be returned in future years and, while not impacting on eligibility, they include taking a risk-based forecasting approach based on demand and making a reduction of £37 million in the budget for concessionary fares.

Throughout the process we have made savings that we consider will have the least impact on public services and on individuals. Still, those decisions have not been easy and—in particular, the reduction in employability funding—they will not be without consequences. Given the circumstances that we face, however, they are unavoidable. At a time of acute labour shortages, historically low unemployment and soaring inflation, we have taken the view that we must prioritise wage increases over spending on employability. That is not a decision that we have taken lightly. It is not a decision that we would have wanted to take.

Any changes to budgets will be formally set out to Parliament in the budget revision process, but it is in the public interest that underlying savings are set out now, so that the scale of the challenge that we face is clearly understood and so that no one in the Parliament, or anyone who is negotiating pay deals, can be unaware of it. Many of the individual savings are small amounts of money, but together they add up to a significant reduction in expenditure, thereby enabling money to be invested in addressing the financial challenges that we face. Last week’s intervention by the Scottish Government in the local government pay dispute demonstrates what we are having to do. In order to shift to full consolidation of the award, further savings had to be made.

I have committed to publishing the outcome of the emergency budget review within two weeks of the UK fiscal event that is planned for later this month. Further savings will be required to balance the budget, especially if inflation continues to rise. The majority of our spend cannot be changed at this stage of the financial year. It is contractually committed or supports vital programmes. In short, what I have set out today is just the beginning of the hard choices.

There is one further point that Parliament must reflect on, and this is why I require time, following a UK fiscal event, before I can set out the results of the emergency budget review. For eight weeks we have heard the new Prime Minister talk of unfunded tax cuts—which will not help the lowest-paid people or those who are reliant on universal credit—and of cutting public sector spending to deliver tax cuts for businesses.

If, in pursuing those policies, the United Kingdom Government reduces the budgets of any portfolios for which we have devolved responsibility, the challenge that we face will become harder, as our budget will become smaller. That is the harsh reality of a fixed budget and limited powers. The Scottish Government simply does not have access to many of the levers that would provide the greatest support in this crisis, such as those relating to taxation of windfall profits, regulation of the energy market and borrowing.

That is why the new Prime Minister and her new chancellor must take action immediately. They have reserved to themselves the powers to deal with this crisis, so my appeal to the United Kingdom Government is to cancel the energy price rises and fund the targeted support that people desperately need; to help families who will struggle to feed their children and heat their homes this winter; and to provide the additional funding that is necessary to meet the impact of higher public sector pay and inflation.

We will do everything that we can. We will make the hard choices, but only the UK Government can act to end this crisis. It should do so, and I encourage it to do so now.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that were raised in his statement. I intend to allow about 40 minutes for questions, after which we will need to move on to the next item of business.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

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

One word was missing from the statement, which was “sorry”—sorry to the people of Edinburgh and those in the rest of Scotland for the impact that the strikes have had on their lives, especially here in our capital city, where waste piled up on the streets for 12 days during our showcase Edinburgh festivals.

Scottish Conservatives warned Scottish National Party ministers during the passage of the SNP-Green budget that councils across Scotland would be put in a position in which they were unable to meet pay demands. Ministers did not listen and, after year-on-year cuts to council budgets, councils were limited in their ability to address local issues. Just this year, local councils have faced a cut of £251 million in real terms.

The cabinet secretary stated today that the Scottish Government is providing £3 billion. However, a report by the independent Scottish Parliament information centre shows that only £490 million of support has been put in place since October 2021. I am sure that the cabinet secretary does not want to mislead Parliament, so I hope that he will correct the record today.

I will ask two specific questions. It is clear that local government needs a new funding settlement, which the Government has failed to deliver for 15 years. Will the cabinet secretary look again at the idea of a new cross-party discussion about local government funding settlements in the future?

The cabinet secretary has announced £53 million of cuts from employability fund schemes. If we are going to face a recession, such schemes will be such an important part of getting people into work and saving jobs in Scotland. At the same time, the SNP Government is keeping £20 million aside for a referendum. Will he rethink that decision and invest in jobs, not a referendum?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I deeply regret the inconvenience that members of the public in Edinburgh and other parts of the country experienced during the disruption to refuse collection. The ability to address the issue and avoid industrial action would have been helped if, when the Government put more money on the table, Conservative leaders in the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities had not voted to offer workers a 3.5 per cent increase as opposed to the 5 per cent increase that the Government had made it possible to fund. The playing of politics by Conservative leaders in COSLA directly caused the industrial action in the city of Edinburgh, and they should be ashamed of themselves.

On funding, before the additional resources that the Government has provided, the local government settlement for 2022-23 represented an increase of 9.2 per cent in cash terms, or 6.3 per cent in real terms. That is a substantial funding increase for local authorities.

Mr Briggs should know me well enough to know that I would never put myself in the position of misleading Parliament, and it is disgraceful that he has made that suggestion. I will happily put in SPICe the substance of the list of support that the Government is putting in place to assist with the cost of living that is being wrestled with by members of the public. I have it in front of me—it totals £2.968 billion, and I will happily put that information with SPICe. Mr Briggs should be careful about whom he accuses of misleading Parliament.

I am happy to take forward discussions about the funding of local authorities; indeed, the Cabinet has agreed to embark on discussions with local authorities about funding, achievement of outcomes and the role of ring fencing, so that we can engage with them on questions of flexibility.

On the point about employability funding, I was explicit in my statement that I would rather not be making that reduction in public expenditure. However, I have no other choice. The point that I made in my summation to yesterday’s debate, which I make again today, is that we are operating in a fixed budget—we can go to no other pot of money than to take that money from existing commitments, which is why we have taken the decision on employability funding.

We think that the judgment is reasoned and rational, because we are experiencing historically low unemployment, we have significant inflationary pressures and the requirement and demand for employability services is likely to be low for the remainder of this financial year. That situation might not be the case in future financial years, as we look at the impacts. The UK Government could act to stabilise the situation, and I hope that it will.

On the question of the allocated resources for the referendum, my statement is focused on this financial year. The commitment to spend £20 million on an independence referendum—for me, that is necessary to ensure that Scotland can decide its own future and get out of the unhealthy and unsatisfactory arrangements of the UK—is expenditure for next year. If Miles Briggs wants to engage substantively in arguments about the challenges of the financial year, let us talk about this financial year and not about the next one.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We have allocated a little more time to reflect the wide interest and the number of members who want to participate, but that will require shorter questions, and shorter answers from the cabinet secretary.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I thank the Deputy First Minister for advance sight of his statement.

Families and businesses across the country are already feeling the pain of rising energy bills, which is why Scottish Labour has called for active measures and welcomes the fact that the Scottish Government has come to agree with many of those pledges.

We appreciate that the Government is not immune from such pressures, as we face an unprecedented economic crisis. However, as well as specifying £500 million of cuts today, the

Deputy First Minister has hinted at a larger figure of £1.7 billion. We need greater clarity.

On the £3 billion of support, the

Deputy First Minister does not need to place anything with SPICe, which has already done the analysis—only £500 million of that figure has been put in place since the rise in energy costs; the rest pre-dates the rise. [

Interruption

.]

The Government does face difficult choices but, if that is to be anything other than a euphemism, we need greater clarity, transparency and honesty.

What is the total value of the funding shortfall for which the Scottish Government is planning? Given that his predecessor suggested that head count would need to be reduced across the public sector by 30,000, will the Deputy First Minister confirm that that reduction forms part of the plans? Given the scale of the cuts that he

has seemed to imply with the £1.7 billion figure, what plans has he asked civil servants to examine? When will he confirm when those plans will be put in place and the timeline for implementing them?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am not quite sure where Mr Johnson gets his £1.7 billion figure from, but I will happily engage with him on those questions. The substance of the challenge that we face is the rising costs in budget lines. The point that I made about the £1.7 billion relates to the value of our budget because of the impact of inflation. Clearly, we are managing the challenges within the overall budget figure.

I estimate—I have already cited this figure to Parliament—that, on the basis of existing offers, the additional cost of public sector pay is about £700 million. That is a substantial sum of money that we must reconcile within a fixed budget. What I have set out today takes us substantively towards addressing many of the challenges.

Mr Johnson asked about some of the references to head count in the resource spending review. At this stage, none of my predictions on what will happen in the years to come would affect the contents of the resource spending review but, of course, we will have to turn the resource spending review into individual budgets. That process will be determined by many of the decisions that the UK Government takes on the contents of its budget for the next financial year.

To reiterate a point that I made in my statement, if the UK Government reshapes the balance of its budget between what it expects to generate in tax and what it intends to deploy in spending, that will undoubtedly have an effect on our budget, which may require us to revisit some of the assumptions in the spending review.

The budget will go through the normal process of parliamentary scrutiny. The autumn budget revisions will go to the Finance and Public Administration Committee in due course and there will be an opportunity to fully scrutinise all the changes that I am making. I am here today to provide transparency on the changes that we are having to make. Such a statement would not ordinarily be made at this stage in the parliamentary year. It is because we are having to take operational decisions of such a magnitude as we have never taken before that I have come to Parliament to make a statement and to address members’ questions.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

It has taken us 10 minutes to do two questions, and we have 18 members who want to ask questions and half an hour for them to ask those questions, so we will have to pick up the pace a bit.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Although £82 million of what the Deputy First Minister calls savings is actually Barnett consequentials from the UK Government, can he provide more detail on the precise impact of the cuts to the budget? He has given us broad outlines, but I think that people deserve to know what the real impacts will be on rural communities, training funds and, of course, employability schemes. Can he give the people who will face the cuts a bit more detail on what the impacts will be?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the aspiration that Mr Rennie sets out. We will engage in parliamentary scrutiny on such points and answer and address any questions that members have on them.

At the outset, I offer the reassurance that the Government is trying to take a set of decisions that minimises the impact on individuals. That will not be possible in all circumstances, but we are trying to take decisions that minimise the impact on individuals and to make judgments about when we think it is appropriate for us to reduce funding with that objective in mind.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I believe that all MSPs are keen to see everyone in employment paid more, given that we have rocketing inflation. However, given the financial straitjacket of devolution and the fact that we have had real-terms cuts to Scotland’s budget of 5.2 per cent this year, even before inflation spiked, what are the implications for the sustainability of Scotland’s public finances? Is the Scottish Government looking at whether it can continue to mitigate UK Government cuts in reserved areas?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The expectations on public sector pay in the budget were at 2 per cent. We are obviously at an increased level, and consolidated salary increases will flow through to future years, which will place increasing pressure on future years’ budgets. We must restate annually the contents of the resource spending review in order to take account of those factors. That puts increasing pressure on the Scottish Government’s budget and, as Mr Gibson highlighted, we do not have the range of flexibilities that we need to expand the size of that cake.

The Government will reflect on the decisions that need to be taken as we look at the contents of the budget, but we believe that it is vital that we sustain the support to mitigate the actions of the UK Government, especially for people in our society who are vulnerable, in order to protect our citizens in their time of need.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I remind members who wish to ask a question to press their request-to-speak button now or as soon as possible.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

With tomorrow’s announcement from the UK Government, there is the possibility that the Scottish Government will receive additional funding as a result of the tax cuts down south. Can the Deputy First Minister confirm that the Scottish Government would use that money, should it arise, to fund tax cuts for hard-working Scots to avoid us being the highest-taxed part of the UK?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will wait until I see all the detail before I decide what the tax stance of the Scottish Government and the proposals are going to be. We will see what the contents of tomorrow’s announcements are, but I reiterate my point to Parliament that, if there is an approach that rebalances tax and spending in the United Kingdom, I would imagine that there will be an impact on the spending power of the Scottish Government. That is an issue that Parliament will have to wrestle with very carefully.

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

In the Deputy First Minister’s statement, we were reminded that the bulk of benefits are reserved to Westminster, in particular the state pension. Incidentally, I do not think that that is a benefit—it is an entitlement.

Forty per cent of those who are entitled to pension credit do not claim it, and it has been like that for over a decade. Pension credit is a gateway to other benefits, so that saves the Treasury billions.

As the UK Government is not pushing those claims—that may be deliberate—what can the Scottish Government do, despite the matter being reserved, to help Scottish pensioners claim their entitlement, which makes such a difference to so many?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is a very important issue and it is one of the areas of work that is taken forward by the financial advisory services that the Government funds around the country. There is advice available to members of the public.

There is obviously a question about the degree to which people are aware of these opportunities to supplement their income entirely appropriately. I will take forward the point that Christine Grahame makes, to ensure that our advice agencies understand the importance of encouraging awareness of the opportunities.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

It is local government that usually takes the hit when it comes to Government cuts. The country has seen the impact of £6 billion of cuts over the past decade. What will the impact of the review be on local councils and communities?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I indicated earlier, in the local government finance settlement for this year, there was a 9.2 per cent cash-terms increase for local government and a 6.3 per cent real-terms increase. That is before we get to the additional money that I put into local government as a consequence of the pay deal.

Local government, in a very tight financial settlement, is being well supported. As I indicated in my answer to Mr Rennie, we are trying to minimise the impact of any judgments on individuals and communities, and that will be the approach that the Government continues to take as we look for ways to support those who are facing the greatest challenge from the cost crisis.

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

The workforce in the third and voluntary sector play an important role in delivering key services across Scotland, often in partnership with Government and local authorities. Today’s announcement will have an impact directly on them, I am sure.

What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the pay and other financial pressures on the sector? What can the Scottish Government do to support the sector at this hugely challenging time?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I acknowledge the significance of the third sector and its importance in providing support to individuals, which we saw during the pandemic and is ever more necessary now, during the cost crisis.

The sector will be under the same financial pressures that the Government is under. Our ability to support the sector to a greater extent is an issue that we will keep under constant review as we look for ways to maximise the support that is available, to provide resilience and capability in communities to meet the effects of the financial crisis that we face.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Does the Deputy First Minister agree that, if the Scottish Government had not wasted hundreds of millions on ferries that do not float, the malicious prosecution of Rangers, the delays with the sick kids hospital, of course, and other botched SNP projects, he would not be announcing the £560 million cut that he is announcing today?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Bluntly, no, because most of what Pam Gosal talked about was capital expenditure, and we cannot use capital expenditure to pay folks’ salaries. It is just not possible. I am very happy to answer questions in Parliament, but it would be helpful if they were slightly more relevant to the realities of life.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

Today, the Deputy First Minister has outlined the hundreds of millions of pounds of savings that will have to be made for the Scottish Government to make the enhanced pay offer to public sector workers. Nobody wants to see those savings made, but we have heard how the Scottish Government’s fixed budget has fallen in real terms under

Westminster, so we do not have a choice. Mr Briggs might want to think on that. Does the

Deputy First Minister

agree that not only do we need Westminster urgently to provide additional funding but we need independence, to put future decisions firmly in the hands of the Scottish Parliament and not the Tories at Westminster?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The cost crisis illustrates the limitations of this Parliament’s ability to deal with changing and dynamic circumstances.

During Covid, we saw the United Kingdom Government extend its financial interventions to a quite extraordinary level. That was welcome. It was necessary in that moment, and it is necessary now. However, it would be better if we were able to take the decisions in this Parliament, as an independent Parliament, about the choices that our people need to face. It would be better if we had those controls at our disposal and did not have to wait for the UK Government to take decisions that we hope will assist us in our endeavours.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

At this moment, as the cabinet secretary outlines £500 million of cuts, public corporation Scottish Water has reserves of almost £500 million, following its price hike earlier this year—a rise that looks set to happen again next year. Has the cabinet secretary demanded that public corporations that have vast reserves play their part in easing the financial pressures that millions of Scottish households face by holding down utility bills and investing in capital projects such as public district heat networks that get houses, public buildings and businesses off the gas grid?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I expect all public bodies, including public corporations, to play their part in assisting the Government as we wrestle with the unprecedented situation that we face.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

A number of claims have been made in recent weeks about the status of the Scottish reserve. The Deputy First Minister referenced the reserve in his statement; will he expand on what he said and clarify the status of the reserve at present and what has been allocated from it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

At the statement that Mr Arthur gave to the Parliament on the provisional Scotland reserve position at the end of the financial year, the expectation was that the reserve would hold £650 million. The budget bill provided for

£511 million of that to be inserted into the budget, and we expect to deploy the remaining £139 million at the autumn budget revisions, to support announcements that have already been made to provide assistance to different aspects of public policy in the course of the Government’s work.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I welcome the fact that tackling the cost of living crisis is front and centre of the Scottish Government’s programme for government.

In comparison, the UK Government has been missing in action. That has caused anxiety for families and businesses, not only in my Aberdeen Donside constituency but across the country.

Has the new UK Government contacted the Scottish Government to outline the emergency plans that are needed to tackle the cost of living crisis?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have to say that nothing has reached me yet. That is not to say that there have not been approaches about dialogue. However, nothing has reached me at this stage.

As I indicated to Parliament yesterday, the First Minister asked the previous Prime Minister to arrange four-nations discussions on the cost of living emergency. Her request was turned down at that stage. I have been in touch with the former chancellor and I wrote to the new chancellor overnight to request an urgent intervention to address the very issues that Jackie Dunbar has raised.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The cabinet secretary revealed today that almost £10 million will be cut from the justice budget. At today’s Criminal Justice Committee meeting, Police Scotland voiced real concern about SNP cuts resulting in fewer officers on our streets. Without giving us the usual stock excuses that blame the UK Government, will the cabinet secretary tell people why

jeopardising public safety is the right thing to do?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I would not countenance

jeopardising public safety and I do not think that it helps the quality of debate for Mr Findlay to go chucking around accusations like that. I remind Mr Findlay that crime in Scotland is at a 40-year low and that we properly and effectively fund the Police Service.

I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans has been able to secure a 5 per cent pay increase for police officers. The whole purpose of my statement is to indicate to members that there are limitations on the resources that we have available to us and that we will have to make hard choices. However, as part of those hard choices, I am pleased that our Police Service serves us so well and that we have such low levels of crime in Scotland today.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

It seems to me that some organisations, some businesses and perhaps some individuals have been making huge profits during Covid and the energy price challenges. Does the Deputy First Minister support the idea of a windfall tax? Is there anything that the Scottish Government can do on that, or are we dependent—again—on Westminster?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As ministers have made clear, there are very strong arguments for windfall taxes, and we have supported measures that have been taken forward in that respect. We believe that, if there are windfall profits out of the proceeds of a range of different activities, there is an argument to consider whether those should be the subject of additional taxation.

Mr Mason will appreciate, though, that issues of corporate taxation are reserved to the United Kingdom Parliament, and the Scottish Government has very limited scope to take forward any issues of that type. We can explore any issues that may arise through the non-domestic rates system, but I stress that that is very much a peripheral approach to tackling the scale of the issue that Mr Mason raises with me.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

I listened carefully to what the cabinet secretary said about operational decisions for this year, but Scotland’s two richest families have as much wealth as the poorest 20 per cent of the population. What work is being done to consider how the Scottish Parliament’s existing tax-raising powers—for example, over land-based taxes—could be used to target the super-rich, whose wealth has increased substantially during the pandemic?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government takes forward on-going discussions to consider the exercise of the tax powers over which we have existing competence. The conclusions of those discussions will feature in the budget proposals that will be brought forward later in the year, and members will have the opportunity to scrutinise those.

There are very limited opportunities for the Government to extend beyond those existing tax responsibilities, but we consider all those questions as part of our efforts to ensure that the public finances are sustainable.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The Deputy First Minister touched on some of the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to mitigate the cost of living crisis. Can he provide any further detail on how the Scottish Government will maximise the current direct financial assistance that is available to those who are most in need, taking into account the financial straitjacket that the Scottish Government is subject to—sadly—under the current constitutional settlement?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In answering Annabelle Ewing’s question, I cite the Scottish child payment as probably the most recent and significant intervention in the matter. It represents a very welcome and highly focused intervention to support families who face financial challenge and difficulty. We set out yesterday that it will be extended in November and that the payment will be increased.

That is one example—there are others that I could list—of where the Government is taking action to support families who face challenge. Doing that forces us to make choices about how we use our resources because, if we fund the Scottish child payment, we are not able to fund other proposals and services that other people may wish us to fund.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Can the Deputy First Minister confirm that no budget has been taken from this year’s allocation to the just transition fund for the north-east and Moray, and that every penny of the £20 million from this year’s budget will be allocated this year?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

No money has been taken from the north-east transition fund. Whether all of it will be allocated this year is a matter that will be subject to ministerial decision making in the course of this year, but we want to see that money allocated in full for the remainder of this financial year.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Normal independent countries have and will be using extensive borrowing powers to ease the burden of the cost of living crisis. What progress has been made in discussions with the UK Government with regard to more flexibility within the existing fiscal framework, particularly around additional borrowing powers, which are needed now more than ever?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We are in what I would call the foothills of discussions about the fiscal framework, and there are some mountains yet to be climbed. We will raise and discuss those issues, and the response that we will get from the UK Government will be a matter for further consideration and explanation to Parliament. However, this crisis and Covid illustrate the necessity for the Government and Parliament to have a wider range of financial powers and flexibilities to enable us to manage the challenges that we face.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

The Deputy First Minister will be aware that, before Covid, the number of people with disabilities in employment in Scotland was lower than the number in the rest of the United Kingdom. Covid has meant that many disabled people have been left behind. The cuts to employability training will affect the most vulnerable disabled people in our society. What message does that send to disabled people in Scotland? It says that they are not important with regard to getting back into employment. Will he rethink the cuts, particularly around disability?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I hear Mr Balfour’s point and I understand it. He makes a fair point, but the challenge that I face is that I cannot spend money twice. That is the point that we are reaching because of the pressures that we are facing. I hear what he says and I will explore what opportunities there are to try to address the issues that he raises, but we are under severe financial pressure, and to meet the costs of public sector pay, we have to take the decisions that we are taking.

I will try to minimise the impact on members of the public—I have given Parliament that assurance today—but the wider context for our financial pressures is set by the parameters in which we operate from the UK Government. If those were relaxed, I would be in a position where I could allocate more money than I am able to allocate today.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, cabinet secretary. I observe that the response to my appeal to pick up the pace was absolutely exemplary and it has set the standard for the rest of the session.

Programme for Government (Cost of Living)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a debate on the programme for government and the cost of living. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons now or as soon as possible. I call Patrick Harvie to open the debate.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

As the First Minister said yesterday, the programme for government comes against the backdrop of unprecedented circumstances—circumstances that threaten a humanitarian emergency in every community in the country. The crisis is impacting on people of all walks of life, but that impact will not be evenly felt. People on low incomes, those with poor health or who are in precarious work, those with families—especially young children—and people renting their homes will be among the hardest hit.

As a responsible Government, in order to support people, especially during this winter, we are determined to act to mitigate the impact of the crisis to the maximum extent possible within our limited powers and resources. That includes providing support for energy bills, childcare, health and travel as well as social security payments that are not available elsewhere in the UK. The programme for government also outlines important steps to support people who rent their homes, and that is what I will focus on in my speech.

First, on financial support, we are providing more than £88 million in housing support this year. That builds on the £39 million of additional funding that has already been provided to protect tenants as a result of the pandemic. In our programme for government, we have committed to extending eligibility for the tenant grant fund. That means that, as well as supporting tenants with pandemic-related rent arrears, the fund will now be able to help people who are struggling to pay rent due to cost of living pressures. We are also providing an additional £5 million for discretionary housing payments so that they can help people with energy costs as well as with rental liabilities. That takes our total investment in DHPs to more than £88 million and provides a lifeline for many people.

For some people, renting a home is a choice that they have made freely and happily, and their rented home is of good quality, secure and affordable. For others, that is not the case. People who rent, especially in the private rented sector, spend a greater proportion of their income on housing than do people who own their homes. Tenants have, on average, lower incomes. In the private rented sector, energy standards are also poorer. Therefore, many people who live in a rented home already faced an incredibly challenging and precarious financial situation, and the new crisis only exacerbates those problems for many tenants throughout Scotland.

Although we know that, as the Government regularly restates, there are many responsible landlords who provide a good service and try to protect their tenants, we also know that that is not universal. I am certain that I am not the only MSP who has constituents getting in touch about eye-watering rent increases.

Few people would defend the extraordinary inaction from the UK Government over the summer or the frankly insulting remarks of the man who overstayed his tenure in Downing Street, who said that people should deal with the energy crisis by buying a new kettle. We have to hope that we will see some significant action from the new Prime Minister. However, throughout the leadership campaign, she repeatedly refused to commit to providing sufficient support to deal with the crisis. That is not what the Scottish Government will do.

We have examined what we can do within our devolved powers and limited budget to support people who are bearing the brunt of the crisis now. We have, of course, already taken important steps. We put in place direct support and stronger housing rights during the pandemic, and we have since made them permanent. In doing so, we made it clear that we would continue to seek new ways to give the support that is needed. That is why our programme for government sets out new, immediate and bold action that we will take.

We will work with the Parliament to introduce emergency legislation that will be designed to protect tenants by freezing rents and imposing a moratorium on evictions until at least the end of March next year. We will ensure that rents are, in effect, frozen from yesterday, when the announcement was made, and we will introduce a prohibition on executing eviction decrees for a limited period, which will be similar to the measures that were in place during the pandemic.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations has warned against Government rent controls in the social housing sector. What consultation—if any—has the Government undertaken on the measures?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government and I have had conversations with the social housing sector. We are very aware that we need to take account not only of the protection that people need from rent increases but of the social housing sector’s need to invest in the provision of new homes and improvements in quality. We will continue to make great efforts to engage with the sector as we move forward.

The proposed rent freeze will be in place across both parts of the rented sector. Any emergency action must, by definition, be temporary and its on-going necessity must be continually reviewed. Therefore, given the huge uncertainty as to what the next six months and beyond will bring, we intend to build in regular review points and consider carefully whether and how any measures might be extended beyond that initial period and how those measures will impact on and complement the longer-term reform of the rented sector to which we have already committed during the parliamentary session.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

Like Labour, the Scottish Greens are committed to providing support for tenants. In their manifesto, they committed to supporting student renters. They said that,

“regardless of housing provider,”

student renters would

“have the same protections as those with Private Rented Tenancies”

and that the party would

“Ensure that rent controls apply to student accommodation.”

Now that the minister is in Government, I want to check with him and get his confirmation that he stands by that and that the rent freeze will also apply to student accommodation.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I will give you the time back, minister.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I appreciate that, Presiding Officer.

I commend the member for her prescience: the very next paragraph in my speech is about exactly that issue. She will be aware that, in the longer-term work that we are doing on the new deal for tenants, we have been undertaking a review of purpose-built student accommodation. In relation to those emergency measures, our plans include students who are renting in the private rented sector. We want them to benefit from the protections that we are putting in place. For students who are in university or college halls of residence or in PBSA, the structure of the contracts is different and often includes energy costs. Therefore, we are working quickly to determine exactly how we can give parity of protection to those students, as it is our intention to achieve that.

I will move on to the issue of evictions. We have always been clear that eviction by a landlord, whether private or social, should always be a last resort when all avenues to sustain a tenancy have been exhausted. Through the recently passed Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Act 2022, we are ensuring that pre-action protocols, which provide further protections against evictions, are made permanent.

However, once again, we find ourselves in unique and unprecedented times. In recognition of that, alongside our bold action to freeze rents until at least the end of March 2023, our emergency legislation will also seek to place a moratorium on evictions. Similarly to the restrictions that were put in place during the pandemic, that action will effectively halt the service and enforcement of evictions across the rented sector. However, cases related to antisocial behaviour or criminality will be allowed to proceed. We are considering what additional safeguards are required, particularly for landlords who find themselves in financial hardship.

Emergency legislation is the linchpin of our action, but it is by no means the whole story. For example, people need to know what their existing rights are—and they are stronger rights than those that exist in other parts of the UK. That will be increasingly important during the next few weeks. Any tenant who, as a result of the announcement that we made yesterday, is told by their landlord that their rent will increase immediately should know that that is illegal and can be challenged. Private landlords must give three months’ notice of any rent increases. Our intention is to shape our emergency legislation to make sure that any notices that are issued after yesterday’s announcement will not come into effect.

Of course, a private landlord cannot simply throw someone out of their home; they must follow the strict legal processes and conditions that are in place. To try to evict tenants without following those routes is illegal and should be reported to the police immediately. If, over the coming days and weeks, any tenant finds that their landlord is trying to immediately increase their rent or make them leave their property without giving the required notice, I urge them to please seek advice from an organisation such as Citizens Advice Scotland, Shelter Scotland, a tenants union or their local housing department. I ask all members to share those messages about the existing rights, as it is very important that we do so. In order to drive awareness of the new and existing protections that are in place for tenants, we will undertake a further awareness-raising campaign over the coming months.

People who rent are not just worried about paying their rent; they and other households are facing many other pressures, which is why we provide such significant financial housing support. That is also why the programme for government commits us to doubling our fuel insecurity fund to £20 million to help households that are at risk of severely rationing their energy use or self-disconnecting entirely. We have also recently committed to an additional £1.2 million to enable the immediate expansion of energy advice services, to ensure that households and businesses receive the support and guidance that they need. We want to make sure that people get all the support that they are able to access, so we are preparing a new Scottish Government cost of living website, which will bring all the potential support and how it applies to people in different personal circumstances into one place.

There is a huge amount more. I am sure that members will highlight their concerns during the debate, and the cabinet secretary will add to my remarks, no doubt, when closing. To be clear, though, all the additional help is already needed—it is by no means an alternative to our demand for a major intervention on energy prices, which the UK Government must make to prevent the October price rise and put additional support in place.

This Government has already proposed bold new plans to deliver longer-term work on a new deal for tenants. We initiated that well before the full nature of the cost of living crisis became clear. It is right that we act now to protect tenants in the context of these exceptional pressures, but our longer-term aims remain. We will keep reviewing our work on that longer-term reform as we go, to ensure that we respond to the immediate pressures without losing sight of the aim of delivering the new deal for tenants that is so vital and needed.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I advise the chamber that we have a bit of time in hand, so anyone who takes an intervention should get the time back.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Yesterday’s programme for government debate set out the extent of this Parliament’s concern about the cost of living challenge that faces both of Scotland’s Governments, not just in terms of addressing the significant economic problems that we are all grappling with as a result of rampant inflation but, just as important, in terms of the resulting social and personal cost in our communities. It is good to hear what the minister has just said about the advice service that will be provided in that regard.

The editorial in Saturday’s

Financial Times

could hardly have been more blunt in its economic analysis of the fragility of the economy, which was that many businesses and members of the public are on the brink, and there is little optimism that the current situation will be short lived. It said:

“A failure to directly support at least the most vulnerable households and enterprises would be catastrophic for the economy”,

and it acknowledged that the effort that is required is on the scale of that which was required to tackle the pandemic.

It has been clear for some weeks that the £37 billion package of support that was announced some months ago by the UK Government, including the £400 payments that will start for households in October and the additional support with winter fuel and disability payments, is not enough, and it is certainly not enough to help those who are most in need.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

With regard to the £400 payments, like Liz Smith, I have many people in my constituency who have oil-fired central heating. Is there any news on whether they, as well as those who are on gas and electricity, will get that £400?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

That is a good question, and I think that the issue was raised in the House of Commons at lunch time today. I believe that some important detail will be forthcoming on that point. The member is quite right to say that the issue affects quite a lot of constituents.

It was also good to hear at lunch time much more about the direction of travel for the new Truss Government when it comes to additional support. In particular, I want to welcome the acknowledgement that what is happening now is on the scale of the pandemic. Most of the economic analysts this morning are predicting a package of upwards of £150 billion of support—that is above the level of support for the Covid pandemic and it would also represent the largest welfare bailout in recent history. Likewise, Liz Truss has indicated that an energy price cap is likely to be put in place at around £2,500 instead of the predicted £3,500.

I hope that those measures will persuade the First Minister that the UK Government is taking this matter extremely seriously. I hope, too, that she will respond accordingly to that commitment, and to the assurances from the new chancellor that there is a need for a large package of support now rather than a package of support that is made available through several incremental changes over time. I think that that will give a little bit of help and much needed relief in the short term.

I hope that the First Minister will also acknowledge and support the assurances that were made by the Prime Minister in her first public statement that this large package of short-term support will be accompanied by policies to address the longer-term imbalances in energy markets. That is important because, as Governments set about tackling this awful crisis not just in this country but in others, too, it is important to pay attention to the most recent economic analysis, and most especially to the factors that are affecting the supply and cost side of the economy, and then those that are affecting the demand side, because tackling each requires slightly different policy approaches.

The on-going war in Russia—especially the action of Vladimir Putin regarding the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline—is, as everyone agrees, the root of the trouble for the supply chains and the basic costs of production.

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

Independent reports have indicated that Brexit has increased food prices by 6 per cent and that sterling has lost 10 per cent of its value, which has impacted on imports. Does Liz Smith agree that Brexit has had that effect? Does she agree with those independent reports?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I think that Christine Grahame knows my views on Brexit, but it is quite clear that Brexit is by no means the root cause of all of the problem. It is very much a global crisis. Many countries that are not involved in the Brexit situation have to contend with exactly the same forces that we have to contend with. Christine Grahame should bear that in mind.

How many times in recent weeks have we been told that businesses, many of which are at the heart of our communities, are on the brink of closing their doors? The situation is not just creating viability issues for those businesses in our constituencies; it is affecting our schools, hospitals and care homes, many of which are the backbone of our society.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will take it if I can get the time back.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You can get the time back, Ms Smith.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Liz Smith raises a very important point about the wider cost crisis that is impacting on public services and businesses throughout our economy. Does she agree that the intervention from the UK Government on energy prices must ensure that all those organisations gain that benefit and that the cost should fall on the shoulders of those who have been raking in record profits?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Yes, I agree with that point. It is not just about the public at large; it is very much about the future of our businesses, and any package of support must deal with the concerns that businesses are facing. I would still like to see the removal of VAT on fuel prices, because that comes through in everybody’s production costs. However, we will have to wait until tomorrow’s announcement by the Prime Minister to find out exactly what that targeted support could be for businesses as well as for the public.

We also need a re-evaluation of world energy markets and a diversification of energy sources. That will not be easy, because of the inherent contradictions in the short term when it comes to pushing ahead with greener options while making the best use of the supply of fossil fuels. I know that the minister will not like that point, but a balance is required. It makes no sense to harbour total opposition to nuclear energy and the exploitation of oil and gas resources in the North Sea. We need a genuine mix of energy if we are to avoid a serious problem in the future. That

mix must be based on need but also on incentives that allow new investment in green alternatives. That is why we must be careful about arguing for longer-term windfall taxes. We must not disincentivise those who can place significant sums of money in our green alternatives.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Will the member take an intervention?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Can I have the time back?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You can have a little more time.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will take one more intervention.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Would the member like to reflect on transmission charges, which act as a disincentive to people in Scotland to do renewable energy, because it costs far more to get that energy on to the network here than it does in the south of England?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Surely that is a way of keeping down the costs to consumers. That is exactly the point that consumers will want addressed in the cost of living crisis.

I will sum up quickly—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Liz Smith has taken a number of interventions, so members who are intervening from a sedentary position should reflect on their behaviour.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I believe strongly that the UK Government must be bold with its economic assistance, but that does not mean that the Scottish Government has no part to play. My colleagues will address some of the issues as we move through the debate.

There is an expectation among our constituents that we act together, listen to one another, talk and co-operate and that we are united in our approach to dealing with the situation. I will repeat what I said yesterday: I do not think that the constant bickering about constitutional issues is at all helpful.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The cost of living emergency means that households are seeing their incomes squeezed like never before. People who are on low incomes or living in poverty were already choosing whether to heat or eat; the choices that they now face are devastating.

Organisations and businesses are also struggling to cover costs, particularly those in the third sector, which—against a £1 million funding cut—faces ever greater demand for its long-recognised expertise in poverty and inequality.

Without sustainable multiyear funding, the support that the sector offers is at risk.

Governments must act right now. The new Tory Prime Minister’s inbox will be, as ours are, bulging with despair and challenge on a scale that has not been seen in generations. Sadly, I do not hold out much hope that she will meet that challenge. I desperately urge her to bring down bills and to listen to my colleagues in Westminster, who have long called for a windfall tax on the energy giants, which are reporting excessive profits at the expense of people.

However, it is not all down to the Tories—the Scottish National Party has failed us too. It has not used the powers that are already held in Scotland to do its bit to ease the bite of the crisis. I welcome the announcement on when the Scottish child payment will be increased and rolled out, and I recognise the impact of that payment. However, it is not enough. For those who are already in receipt of it, it amounts to £30 extra this year. For many, it is too late—the delayed roll-out has meant that the over-sixes either have been left on bridging payments and missed out on vital uplifts, or have fallen through the cracks and received nothing at all. All that has led to children in Scotland missing out on £5 million every single week.

The reality is that much of what was announced yesterday was a rehash of previously announced policies that the Government has delayed and failed to deliver.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I do not understand how Pam Duncan-Glancy can call it “a rehash” when people will receive the money in their pocket from 14 November, which is a date yet to come. Surely she can find it in herself to welcome that money going into the pockets of the families that need it most.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The cabinet secretary will be well aware that the announcements on the Scottish child payment were made on 9 December last year, in relation to doubling the payment, and in the child poverty delivery plan in March, to add a fiver to it. The date that was announced yesterday is the new bit, which is why people who are in receipt of the Scottish child payment will only get £30 extra this year. It is a not a new or significant commitment, and it already means that thousands of children have missed out on millions of pounds. The cabinet secretary and others can shake their heads all they like; that is the reality in Scotland.

Much of what was announced yesterday was a rehash. Despite the SNP’s claim to have spent billions of pounds in response to the current crisis, the Parliament’s impartial information service is clear that much of that relates to long-standing commitments that go back many years, including commitments that were made by the Labour Party when it was in office more than 15 years ago. The actual figure is nearer £500 million, of which half was to pass on the UK Government council tax rebate. The people of Scotland need action and a Government that will be bold and level with them, not one that is more interested in scoring political points than in getting people the help that they need.

Neither Government has the ambition—both are tired and neither is bold enough to tackle the crisis. Members can laugh if they like, but I can tell them that people in Scotland are not laughing.

It is not good enough for the Government to sit on its hands when it holds the power to change people’s lives. It is galling to hope that people do not notice because the comparator is the worst Tory Government in history. The Scottish people are not daft, but they are desperate. They can see their bills going up and their purses getting emptier, and they recognise the lack of support that is coming from the SNP.

We have seen countless opportunities pass by, when the Government could have put money in the pockets of the people who desperately need it. For example, I have heard from disabled people who cannot afford to charge their wheelchairs. The Scottish Government could have acted, but it did not. It failed to live up to its own fuel poverty strategy by refusing to expand the child winter heating assistance to disabled adults and those on all rates of assistance. It failed to keep its promise to maintain the uplift to the carers allowance supplement, and had it used the social security powers for the real radical change that was promised, we would have a more adequate and fairer disability and carers benefits system, and people would have been off to a better start at the beginning of the crisis.

The SNP says that it does not have the powers that it needs to act, but that is not true. When Scotland received consequentials following the UK Government’s initial cost of living package, inadequate as it was, the SNP lazily picked up the blueprint that was drawn up by the Tories and copied it, meaning that some of the most well-off got support, while those who needed it received barely enough to scratch the surface.

There is no excuse: we gave the SNP a plan and showed it how to give the money to the people who needed it most, but the SNP did not use it. Our plan would have seen £1,000 of support get to people who needed it, capped bus fares, cut rail fares and reversed water charge increases—every household would have got a £100 rebate on them. Crucially, we would have targeted £400 at people who needed it the most and were hardest hit. Disabled people, unpaid carers and people on low incomes would have received desperately needed support, and there would have been money left over for the welfare fund too.

It is not too late. The Scottish Government can act now, and I urge it to do so. The problem now is deeper and bigger, so the solutions must be bigger and bolder. Children who are on bridging payments will not receive what they are eligible for until the end of the year—that is a long time to wait when someone is struggling to put food on the table. Doubling it now would really help.

We know the role that debt plays in poverty. People are borrowing money to pay for the basics and to cope with rising bills. Increasing the funding for money advice services to ensure that people get the support that they need to manage what little they have will be crucial. In addition, a winter eviction ban would, of course, ensure that no one is left out in the cold in winter.

Over the past decade, the mismanagement of our economy and the failure of both Governments to work together has meant that living standards and real wages have failed to grow and that we have entered the crisis from a position of significant disadvantage. The country and its people are on their knees. We need more than sticking plasters to get us back on course; we need a stronger, more secure economy that does not just mask poverty but ends poverty and inequality for good.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There is a bit of time in hand. If members have something to say, I would encourage them to make an intervention, which will almost certainly be taken, I am sure.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

I am pleased that the Scottish Government is dedicating this time to debate the cost of living and energy crisis. In the coming days, we will see what plans the new Prime Minister will set out for the country to tackle it.

The Liberal Democrats have already called for—in some cases, they were the first to call for—the rise in the energy price to be scrapped; a support scheme to help businesses deal with the rise in energy prices, as the cap does not apply to them; a national programme to insulate homes; and a doubling of the warm home discount and the winter fuel allowance.

It is no exaggeration to say that people are fearful and worried sick about how they will pay their energy bills this winter. The fact is that many cannot pay the sums that are being spoken about. That insidious thought is impacting on businesses and households alike, and it is imperative that our Governments do all that they can.

It is not difficult to see disastrous consequences ahead, should we continue down this path: pensioners, including already hard-hit WASPI—women against state pension inequality—women, further limiting heating and eating; single-person households struggling; parents trying their best to feed their children while working all hours to make ends meet; and more children being cold and hungry and growing up in poverty. The child payment increase will help the worst affected, but people with low fixed incomes are already struggling with limited budgets and there will be businesses that cannot survive eye-watering energy cost increases.

Although the programme for government outlined the measures that the Scottish Government will take, more needs to be done.

Last week, Shetland Islands Council highlighted that, by next April, 96 per cent of households in the islands could be in fuel poverty. To stay out of fuel poverty, households in Shetland would need to earn £104,000, compared with £52,000 for their UK counterparts. The irony of Shetland contributing to making Scotland energy rich, as the First Minister described it yesterday, is not lost on those of us who live there.

It is important to highlight the difference in weather patterns across the UK. Not everywhere has experienced the recent 40°C heat and some may never have switched off their heating this summer.

Households across rural Scotland rely on heating oil, rather than on mainline gas. There is no price cap on heating oil and there has been little support from either Government so far to directly help those households.

Homes across Scotland lack adequate insulation to benefit energy bills and efforts to save energy to help tackle the climate emergency.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Beatrice Wishart mentioned oil and gas and those who are off-grid. It is really hard for her constituents in Shetland. Does she agree that the same folk who are off-grid in the south of Scotland are affected, too?

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

Yes, I agree that those people are affected by being off-grid. The impact of that is felt across rural Scotland.

Recent Scottish Liberal Democrat research indicated that it could take us more than 300 years to insulate every fuel-poor home in Scotland, at the pace the warmer homes Scotland scheme is working at. One can only hope that the new investment that was announced yesterday will speed up that process.

The cost of travel is also a great consideration for many households. Petrol prices have fluctuated over the summer and cars are essential in many parts of Scotland. Public transport is not cheap to operate, and it is expensive to use, especially when budgets are squeezed. For many who are reliant on daily train or ferry services to commute, additional travel costs can feel like paying a second mortgage. Although the Scottish Government will point to its announcement on freezing ScotRail prices, that will effectively be in place for only two months.

Any money that is available in the system should be used to help people to navigate the cost of living crisis, not to reheat divisive political arguments.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We move to the open debate. I call Emma Roddick, for a generous four minutes.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I took part in yesterday’s debate on the programme for government, and it was difficult to disconnect any of it from the cost of living crisis. The Scottish Government has clearly made a choice to support people and do what it can to address huge household cash-flow issues.

On the other hand, the new Prime Minister has launched straight into offering a so-called reward for nothing more than being rich, by cutting tax for high earners and prioritising what she calls “economic growth”, which we know is her shorthand for saying that the rich are getting richer, rather than making sure that people in UK countries can access food and warmth.

The fact that the Scottish child payment is being raised for the second time this year is the perfect illustration of the SNP’s priorities, but it is far from the only measure here that will have a huge impact for those who are in poverty or who are just about managing.

When I campaigned for independence in 2014, we talked a lot about a tale of two Governments and a tale of two futures. However, this is not just a tale of two futures; it is a tale of two presents. As social security is partially devolved and partially reserved, it provides a perfect illustration of the contrast between the UK Tories’ approach to social security and the fairness that we have here.

The Social Justice and Social Security Committee recently received a briefing from a researcher at the University of Glasgow that dug deeper into the statistics on Department for Work and Pensions benefit sanctions. Many of us will remember the rising Covid rates this spring but, in May 2022, a universal credit claimant who was out of work was around three times more likely to be on benefit sanctions than to have Covid. One in fourteen such people were under sanction at that time. The DWP’s approach is punitive, hostile and degrading.

Social Security Scotland, on the other hand, is already delivering 12 benefits, seven of which are new and exclusive to Scotland, and has outstanding feedback. In the most recent client survey, 93 per cent of respondents described their overall experience as very good or good, which is a higher satisfaction rate than the DWP’s target number, which it is still a long way from reaching. The difference is now so stark that I struggle to see how anyone can deny it.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The member will be aware that there was a target for the adult disability payment as well, but it is now no longer on the Social Security Scotland website. Does she agree that we need to ensure that the target is retained so that people know how quickly their application will be processed?

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

It is very important to have targets. Pam Duncan-Glancy and I are both members of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, and it is important for us to be able to scrutinise such matters. I know that that question has been raised in the committee and I am sure that an answer will be forthcoming.

One Government is making itself and its donors richer, and one is supporting people through a cost of living crisis. One Government sees the value in keeping kids out of poverty, and one contemptuously insists that it will not resort to what it calls handouts, as if handing food to a hungry bairn is a bad thing.

This summer, my team and I spent a lot of time trying to get help for constituents who had responded to my cost of living survey. Ninety-eight per cent of respondents to that said that they were worried about their energy bills, and that even included people who are really quite well off. Seventy-four per cent said that the cost of living was affecting their mental health.

We are talking about fundamentals. There is a disagreement between the UK Government and the Scottish Government about what sort of society we want to be. Do we want to be a society in which we look after one another, or one that protects the wealthiest and engages in a race to the bottom on employment, housing and even human rights for the rest of us?

Across the Highlands and Islands, folk are displaying their intention to have the kind of society in which people look after one another. In South Ronaldsay, where Orcadians are likely to face extreme fuel poverty and struggle to heat their homes this winter, a local church has turned into a warmth bank. That should not be necessary, but thanks to inaction from the UK Government, people will rely on such places to survive.

The anti-democratic stance that the Tories are taking is up to them, but Scotland does not agree with them. I do not know how many times this country will have to vote SNP before the Tories admit to themselves that their insular conservative politics are just not winning hearts and minds. Scotland has made its choice, and the SNP Government is simply listening and acting on the wishes of the electorate. If the Tories will not listen, hell mend them.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I begin on a note of consensus regarding some aspects of the programme for government that

I welcome, and which I have indeed campaigned for. The children’s care and justice bill is a welcome development, and I hope that it will finally deliver on the promises that have been made to care-experienced young people. I also hope—as I have discussed and hope to discuss again with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills—that it represents a move to end restraint of children in care settings. The First Minister has made a number of key promises to care-experienced young people, and this must be the time when they are delivered on.

I also welcome the announcement of the establishment of a Scottish patient safety commissioner. The devil will be in the detail on the proposal, but it can and must help improve patient advocacy.

In the limited time that I have today, I wish to concentrate my comments on housing, as the Minister for Zero Carbon Buildings, Active Travel and Tenants’ Rights did. It is clear that storm clouds are starting to gather on the horizon of the Scottish housing market. Over the past year, the cost of building a home has increased by an average of 17 per cent. Over the past two years, the cost of building a new home in Scotland has increased to over £200,000. The decision by SNP ministers to remove the first home fund and help to buy for first-time buyers has pulled the ladder up for many aspirational Scots, and it has negatively impacted on the housing sector.

The national planning framework, as it stands, is not fit for purpose, and it needs to be redrafted to help facilitate the delivery of housing and renewables targets. We need a housing revolution in Scotland. It is disappointing that the Scottish Government has not included housing as a key infrastructure priority through its national planning framework. That needs to change. If there is going to be a slowdown in the construction sector in the months ahead, it is vital that both the Scottish Government and local government work to retain construction jobs, so I hope that ministers will actively consider reintroducing help-to-buy schemes and moving forward on shovel-ready projects.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

On first-time buyers support, as Miles Briggs will know, we have shifted resource to those who can least afford to buy so as to help them to get on to the property ladder, which they would not otherwise be able to do. He will also know that those who accessed the previous funds would have been able to purchase without that support. In the light of what the Deputy First Minister said earlier about constrained finances, is Miles Briggs saying that we should shift that money away from those on the lowest incomes towards those who are better off? I just want clarity about where that money is coming from.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I can give you the time back for that intervention, Mr Briggs.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

On the question of supporting people to enter the property market, the cabinet secretary will be aware that so many people who do not have the money for a deposit relied on the schemes, which, for many, now do not exist. Builders are saying that first-time buyers are not coming forward for properties in Scotland. Those homes do not just exist for them to then—

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will the member take a further intervention?

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Yes.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The evidence, which I can send to Miles Briggs, is that the first-time buyer market is actually very buoyant. There may be issues in the city of Edinburgh, for all the reasons that we understand, but on a Scotland-wide basis the first-time buyer market is very buoyant. Surely we should be putting our resources to those who would otherwise not be able to enter the housing market without government assistance. If Miles Briggs wants to widen that provision, he must tell us where the money is coming from.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Not for the first time, the cabinet secretary does not understand Edinburgh. As for where first-time buyers want to get on the property ladder, the current price does not allow them even to get on to it. [

Interruption

.] Well, there has been no solution brought forward by the cabinet secretary; the Government has pulled the ladder up. [

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Excuse me. Could the front bench please not heckle from a sedentary—

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Part of what we need to see is a change of priority.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Briggs, I ask you to take your seat.

Mr Briggs has taken a couple of interventions from the front bench. Therefore, he has the right to expect the front bench not to heckle him when he is responding to the interventions that he has heard.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I do welcome the provisions that have briefly been outlined today on homelessness prevention, which will be included in the housing bill. However, the housing bill cannot simply be an attempt to cover over SNP cracks in the wall. The housing crisis that we are facing is a result of the fact that SNP-Green and Labour-Liberal Democrat Scottish Governments over the past 20 years have failed to deliver the affordable homes that they promised to communities across Scotland.

The announcement of a rent freeze scheme may have grabbed the headlines, but there has been no consultation or opportunity for Parliament to properly scrutinise how it will be legally implemented. Ministers must now demonstrate how they intend to deliver on the policy.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Clearly, we will introduce legislation, which will go through parliamentary scrutiny, and it has to meet the legal tests, just as any proposed legislation going through Parliament does. Is the member actually saying that we should have signalled our intention in advance, resulting in a wave of rent increase notices before that legislation was in place?

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I am saying to the minister that he should have consulted, because just a few short months ago, when he and his colleagues voted against Labour’s proposals, he described them in the chamber as unworkable and said that, in the long term, they would heighten the risk of eviction and destabilise an already vulnerable housing sector.

Perhaps that is why, as I have said to him, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations is warning the Government that rent controls will destabilise the social housing sector. It would be extremely regrettable—indeed, it could drive a Scottish housing crisis—if the policy results in fewer rental properties being made available, especially in parts of Scotland such as the capital where the private rental market is already overheated.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I will, if I can get the time back.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You can, but it should be a brief intervention.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

The UK Government is consulting on a rent cap in the social rented sector. Does Miles Briggs support the UK Government’s intervention in that market?

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I am concerned about the impact, because the Scottish Government’s proposals could lead to the loss of private rented property. I do not know whether Labour expects that to happen or whether it would be happy with that, but we cannot allow private rented properties, especially in the capital, not to be made available. That would mean that they would not be available for students—students could be camping in fields when they go to university, as we have seen in parts of Europe. We cannot allow that to happen. Those properties cannot leave the market, because there are no homes to replace them with.

Organisations that have expressed concerns are looking for an answer. The answer is a mixed housing approach with more social rented affordable housing targeted at lower earners; it is not to destabilise the sector even further.

It is concerning that the Scottish Government has still not published its review on housing for varying needs. Organisations such as MND Scotland have called for action to fast-track applications for adaptations and accessible housing for people with life-limiting conditions such as motor neurone disease. I hope that the review will be published as soon as possible.

The programme for government has the potential to drive a housing crisis in Scotland. Ministers should be warned that the problems that they are seeking to solve could be made much worse by their actions. I hope that they will think properly about what they are proposing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Christine Grahame to speak for about four minutes.

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

Oh! I just extended my speech because I thought that we had time.

I welcome the increase in the child payment to £25 and the extension of the payment to every child under the age of 16 in a qualifying household, which is due by the end of the year. This is the only part of the UK with that intervention. More than 2,500 children in Midlothian and a similar number in the Borders are already benefiting from the payment. Surely to goodness members across the whole chamber can say that the policy is a great idea.

The freeze to rents for private and social housing is a bold but necessary move—we are in a crisis. Free school meals for primary 5s and those younger—with the determination to extend the policy to all children in primary school—assist fundamentally the wellbeing of children and the family at large. In the first three years of the policy, baby boxes have been delivered to more than 144,000 homes, with an incredible 93 per cent uptake. We have free prescriptions, while prescriptions now cost more than £9 per item in England. We have free bus travel for all under-22s and over-60s. We have no tuition fees. Those are just a few examples of the socially just measures that the Scottish Government has carried, and is carrying, forward.

That is a different world from the one south of the border, and it is a pity that Pam Duncan-Glancy is not here—[

Interruption

.] Oh, she is back. I am glad that she is here, because she seemed to think that we are sitting on our hands. If that is sitting on our hands, let us have more of it. I am proud of those initiatives.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

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

Let me get into my flow a wee bit.

The energy and cost of living crisis has reminded us how vulnerable devolution leaves us. The public sector pay increases were budgeted for when inflation was at 3 per cent, but it is now at 10 per cent, and it will probably rise. Of course, people rightly look to protect themselves and their dependents from this economic tsunami, and the Scottish Government is right to try to meet the demands, but we must all accept—although Opposition parties seem to think that we have a forest of money trees—that, with a fixed budget and very limited borrowing powers, money will be cut from other budgets. Devolution must wait for this unelected Prime Minister to, perhaps, give the devolved Governments so-called handouts.

Importantly, the crisis exposes the fragility of the UK economy under the stewardship of the Tories and their successive—although not successful—Prime Ministers and the stark limitations of devolution.

The UK economy was always built on the sands of consumerism and credit. Energy, wind power and tidal power have not really financially benefited Scotland or the UK. Those turbines in the Borders are not Scottish built—they are probably Danish—and the energy from our natural resources was hawked off to international companies, as happened in the 70s with the oil. Even the retail energy companies are owned by a Spanish group for Scottish Power and by the French state for EDF Energy.

In the 70s—this is an important history lesson—inflation flew off the Richter scale by more than 23 per cent, while oil revenues flooded the UK Treasury. Not a penny was saved for a rainy day; every one was used to prop up a failing UK economy. Norway, by contrast, set up Statoil—still more than 60 per cent state owned—and saved that unexpected energy bonus in the Norwegian pension fund, which is now in credit in trillions. The UK banked nothing.

UK debt is more than 100 per cent of gross domestic product. If it were a business, it would be filing for bankruptcy. Add Brexit to that—I say to Liz Smith that my reference was to a report by the UK In A Changing Europe think tank on the impact of Brexit on the economy—and it perhaps explains partly why we are at the bottom with regard to inflation, apart from Russia. We have the highest inflation rate of the G7. Those are hard lessons for Scotland, and they have to be learned.

Here is the bigger picture.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

You must conclude now, Ms Grahame.