Scottish Parliament, 17 November 2022

301 contributions from 67 members. The official report.

National Health Service Winter Pressures (Meetings)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

1. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met NHS Fife, Fife health and social care partnership and Fife Council regarding winter pressures. (S6O-01564)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care met Fife Council, NHS Fife and the Fife health and social care partnership

in April and May this year to discuss winter pressures. In October, he convened a meeting on the issue with all local and health authorities and all health and social care partnerships. In addition, Scottish ministers meet directors of health and social care monthly—most recently, on 14 November.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I take the opportunity to praise our hard-working, front-line social care staff.

The fact of the matter is that, as we approach the key winter months, care packages are simply not being arranged timeously by those in Fife Council who are responsible. That causes consequential longer stays in hospital, extremely lengthy waits for vital adaptations, and much stress and anxiety for vulnerable individuals and their families. Given the very serious situation in Fife, will the minister undertake to raise the matter today with the chief executive of Fife Council and ask him to explain what on earth is going on?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Currently, many areas in the country are experiencing a shortage of care-at-home capacity, due to annual leave, sick absence and long-standing recruitment and retention issues, which we are helping partnerships to work through. Given what Annabelle Ewing has said, I am happy to write to Fife Council and the health and social care partnership, and I will get back to her with their response.

I assure the chamber that the cabinet secretary and I are meeting partnerships, councils and boards regularly to ensure that we do our level best for everyone during this winter. I, too, put on record my thanks to all the health and social care staff across the country who are working so hard at this moment.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

A letter to the council will really not cut it. Social care in Fife is in absolute crisis. I have one constituent who was stuck in hospital and wanted to go home but was being pressured to go and live in a care home that they did not want to move to because no social care package was in place. That case is not isolated—the issue is happening all over Fife. When is the minister going to get a grip?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

We are doing all that we can to help with the pressures across the country at the moment. We are still in a pandemic period. There is a huge amount of pressure on our NHS and our social care system. There is greater frailty and acuity among folks, which we all have to recognise.

I say to Mr Rennie and other members that, if folks want to bring cases to my attention, we will follow up and look at those. As I said, we are engaging regularly with local government, health and social care partnerships and health boards. If we know about such scenarios, we will check on them and see what can be done to alleviate some of the difficulties that folks have faced.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I require questions and responses to be more concise.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will try to be concise. The High Valleyfield medical practice in West Fife closed in 2017. NHS Fife took over its running and has tried to fill the general practitioner posts but has, unfortunately, been unable to do so, leaving 4,000 patients in Culross, Newmills and Torryburn without a main GP. Will the minister explain what provision will be put in place, as winter approaches, to cover seasonal need in that already pitiful situation?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I am not aware of the situation in High Valleyfield. As the member will be aware, GPs are the cabinet secretary’s responsibility, not mine. I will take the member’s question to him and will respond her in writing about that situation rather than give a false narrative here today.

Rural Depopulation (Impact of Carbon Offset Schemes)

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it has made an assessment of the impact of carbon offset schemes on rural depopulation. (S6O-01565)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The Scottish Government is committed to taking action to ensure that increasing levels of natural capital investment in Scotland deliver benefits for rural communities and the wider society, in line with the just transition principles and our land reform objectives.

That commitment is set out in more detail in our interim principles for responsible investment in natural capital, which were published in March, and sits within the context of our wider population strategy “A Scotland for the Future”, which includes actions such as the establishment of a Scottish rural community immigration pilot.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Private investment in natural capital may be helpful in enabling the action required to fulfil our ambition to address climate change, but it must be responsible and must take full cognisance of the needs of surrounding communities. Will the cabinet secretary set out how the Scottish Government will ensure that the voices of local communities are heard as we leverage private investment in addressing the climate crisis, so that that is pursued in accordance with our land reform ambitions?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

In our national strategy for economic transformation, we set out very clearly that we will develop a high-integrity, values-led market for responsible investment in natural capital. By “values-led”, we mean that the market will support our commitment to community engagement and benefit and to a just transition.

To achieve that, we will work with communities and with market stakeholders to promote and strengthen the interim principles that were published earlier this year. We will do that by developing best practice through projects such as the one by Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Argyll and Bute Council on carbon markets, through community wealth building and through making links to our land reform policies and legislation in the coming years.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

We will never reverse rural depopulation without tackling the centuries-old inequality of land ownership in Scotland. Instead of promoting carbon offsetting for a wealthy elite, is it not time for the Scottish Government to introduce a land cap so that our natural resources will work for the many, not the few?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The member will be aware that we are going to bring forward land reform legislation during this parliamentary session, in order to ensure that we have robust measures in place for the way in which land is managed in Scotland. We will, no doubt, debate such issues as that bill passes through Parliament.

Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit (Replacement)

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its progress with its plans to replace industrial injuries disablement benefit. (S6O-01566)

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

The Scottish Government has continued to successfully deliver new and complex benefits in challenging circumstances, an achievement acknowledged by Audit Scotland in its social security progress report published in May. We intend to update Parliament early next year on the timetable for further benefit delivery, which will include the replacement of the industrial injuries scheme by employment injury assistance.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

Is the minister aware of the decision by the Department for Work and Pensions to close the United Kingdom office that processes industrial injuries disablement benefit? That has caused significant concern, including worries about the loss of expertise, help and support for those making a claim, including many who are terminally ill and those who are making a claim because of mesothelioma.

The benefit is being transferred to Social Security Scotland. Will the minister meet me, the Clydebank Asbestos Group and others to discuss how the new service should be designed to ensure that it meets applicants’ needs and that they get the dignity, fairness and respect that they have been denied by the DWP?

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

I am concerned by any DWP cutbacks and by the potential impact on people who rely on industrial injuries disablement benefit. Social Security Scotland takes a different approach to the benefits that we currently deliver, for example by investing in a local delivery service that is based in communities across Scotland and offers advice and support to people applying for assistance.

I am aware of the important support that Clydebank Asbestos Group provides to people with asbestos-related diseases and their families. I would be happy to arrange to meet Marie McNair and that group, and I thank her for the suggestion.

Car Clubs

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what role car clubs can play in reducing the number of private cars in Scotland’s cities. (S6O-01567)

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

Car clubs are going from strength to strength in Scotland. They have the potential to reduce reliance on private car ownership, reduce inequalities and help to protect our climate. Collaborative Mobility UK’s 2021 report found that the average car club vehicle in Scotland replaces 17 private cars. We have a commitment to reduce the number of kilometres that are travelled by car by 20 per cent by 2030, and car clubs can play a role, in combination with other interventions, in supporting sustainable travel.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I thank the minister for that answer. Can she update us on the progress that is being made on the mobility credits scheme? What role can car clubs and daily rental vehicles play in supporting that programme, thereby reducing the number of private vehicles on the road?

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

Following the commitment to pilot a mobility and scrappage scheme as part of our work to cut transport emissions, I can advise that work on the design of that scheme and what it might deliver is currently being finalised. The proposed pilot will seek to give direct financial support to lower-income households and empower them to make different choices about how they travel.

I am really keen to give the people who will take part in the pilot as much ownership of the decisions as possible, in order that they feel confident that they have the right options to choose from that will best meet their travel needs and their interests. That may include car club membership or the daily rental of low-carbon vehicles, alongside public and active transport options. I will be happy to update Mr Mason and Parliament once the pilot scheme proposal has been finalised.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am glad that the Minister for Transport recognises the value of car clubs, but they are a bit patchy across the country. Will she commit to doing an audit of all car clubs to see where they are and what their range is?

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

I thank Mr Simpson for his supplementary question. It is worth pointing out that

Transport Scotland provides assistance to car clubs across the country. To date, that programme has supported eight community transport vehicles with a value of up to £400,000. There is additional support across the country in relation to how we can better support zero-emissions transport, but I am happy to take the member’s question away and discuss with Transport Scotland officials the valid point that he makes.

National Performance Framework (Proposed Changes)

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported proposals from the Carnegie Trust to strengthen the national performance framework and make it Scotland’s wellbeing framework. (S6O-01568)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

The n

ational performance framework is Scotland’s wellbeing framework. Increasing wellbeing is central to its purpose, with the 11 national outcomes setting out the type of country that we want to be. I welcome the Carnegie Trust’s latest report on the next steps for the NPF and look forward to its engagement as part of the forthcoming review of the national outcomes.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

I thank the minister for his response. I am sure that, like me, he welcomes the open letter to the First Minister from 115 charities, businesses and others, which contains suggestions to further our commitment to creating a wellbeing economy. However, the fact that various powers such as employment law are reserved to Westminster has been described by Patricia Findlay from the Fair Work Convention as

“undoubtedly a barrier” to our ambitions.

Will the minister ensure that, in any response to the Carnegie Trust or to the 115 signatories to the open letter—or, indeed, at the forthcoming wealth of nations conference—it is understood how much of a brake on our wellbeing ambitions not being a normal independent country is and that we seek power for a purpose: to make a fundamental shift in people’s lives?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I welcome that recent letter, which calls for a transition to a wellbeing economy. Scotland is leading the way in putting national wellbeing at the heart of our decision making, and I agree with the member that progress is hampered by our not having a full range of powers, including over employment law.

The national performance framework sets out the strategic direction for making progress towards the national outcomes, but that is undermined as the United Kingdom Government increasingly bypasses devolution to take public spending decisions in a wholly devolved policy area. That fundamental change undermines a central plank of devolution. Decisions on public spending in devolved policy areas should be taken by the democratically elected Parliament and Government of Scotland.

Rail Infrastructure in South Scotland (Expansion)

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to expand rail infrastructure in the South Scotland region. (S6O-01569)

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

Our railways help us to meet our strategic transport objectives, and the decarbonisation of rail passenger and freight transport will help us to cut transport emissions and meet our climate change targets. In addition, they support our economic and social wellbeing. As the member will know, I recently reopened Reston railway station, in Berwickshire, following a £20 million investment, and we are investing £15 million in another new railway station at East Linton, in East Lothian.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the minister for that answer and for coming to a recent meeting at which we discussed these issues. Does she agree with me that, to achieve net zero, it is vital to provide transport connectivity for areas such as East Lothian, which is one of the fastest growing in Scotland today? Does she welcome the calls by the Rail Action Group East of Scotland for a train connection for Haddington? Will she agree to meet representatives of RAGES, to get Haddington back on track?

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

I very much agree with the sentiment of Mr Hoy’s question. We had a very positive meeting last week, and, as Mr Hoy will know, I met members of the RAGES campaign group when I reopened Reston railway station, earlier this year. I will be more than happy to meet the member and the RAGES group to talk about connectivity in relation to the specific issue at Haddington, which we discussed last week.

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

The Auditor General for Scotland said that there has been a 30 per cent increase in capital costs in Scotland directly as a result of Brexit. Can the minister advise us how that will impact on extending the Borders railway line through Hawick and beyond?

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

The Scottish Government has already allocated up to £5 million through the Borderlands inclusive growth deal to assess the benefits and challenges of extending the Borders railway. That funding will be released on the achievement of agreed milestones and in line with the processes that apply to all growth deals.

Christine Grahame is right to point to the inflationary pressures that are currently hampering and challenging a number of capital projects, particularly in transport. We know that Brexit has also impacted on the availability of materials and costs, and those inflationary pressures are additional.

The Minister for Business, Trade, Tourism and Enterprise and I met representatives of the Borderlands partnership on 6 October to discuss how to advance the proposed work. Following that, we jointly wrote to the United Kingdom Government on 21 October, asking it to give urgent consideration to progressing the deal commitment. We now await a response from the UK Government to that urgent letter, and I will be happy to update the member and Parliament when we hear more from the UK Government on this important matter.

Rural Communities (Access to Dentists)

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that people living in rural communities can access a nearby dentist. (S6O-01570)

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

A

record number of people—more than 95 per cent of the population of Scotland—are registered with a national health service dentist. Across key treatments, NHS dental services are at levels of activity that are comparable to levels last seen before pandemic restrictions were introduced.

We understand that, in certain remote and rural areas, NHS dental access is challenging. That is a historical position, which has been exacerbated by Brexit controls, as well as by the unique difficulties following the pandemic. We have therefore put in place additional recruitment and retention incentives to maximise the opportunities for newly qualified and trainee dentists to work in areas such as the Highlands.

We continue to work with health boards to deliver on the responsibility for NHS dental services in their area, and we know that the respective health boards are working hard to ensure that patients continue to have access to NHS dental services.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The Dalriada dental practice in Campbeltown is struggling to fill a dentist’s vacancy and, as a result, it has temporarily ceased to provide non-emergency treatment. Its patients now have to make a 2.5-hour round trip to Lochgilphead. Will the minister investigate the matter urgently and consider including Kintyre on the list of geographical areas that are eligible to apply for the recruitment and retention allowance in order to help the practice to attract a new dentist and resume all of its services, thereby allowing people in Campbeltown to access dental treatment in their own community?

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

I assure the member that I am more than happy to look at that issue. We are aware that, when dentists leave practices, the posts are difficult to fill. As the member indicates, we have introduced a rural area recruitment and retention allowance, which reflects the particular challenges in attracting dentists to work in more remote areas. I am more than happy to consider that issue for the member.

Shipbuilding (United Kingdom Government Contract)

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. Earlier this week Rishi Sunak announced a £4.2 billion contract to build five type 26 frigates on the Clyde. It is a decision that will protect and strengthen our Scottish shipbuilding industry. The UK Government contract will support 1,700 jobs at Govan and Scotstoun alone, with a further 2,300 jobs in the wider supply chain. Will the First Minister join me in whole-heartedly welcoming this huge investment in Scottish jobs and our economy by the UK Government?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, I do welcome the announcement, and I welcome the recognition of the skills, the talent and the expertise on the River Clyde. Of course, while the relevant responsibilities continue to lie in the hands of the UK Government—albeit with Scottish taxpayers contributing to the cost—it is absolutely vital that Scotland benefits fully.

I welcome the decision, and I take the opportunity to congratulate BAE Systems. I have campaigned over many years for the future of Govan shipyard, which used to be in my constituency and is now in the constituency of Humza Yousaf. However, although I welcome the award of the contract, I am duty-bound to note that the original proposal, back in 2010, was not for five new vessels; it was actually for 13 new vessels. It was said then that all that work would be undertaken on the Clyde.

Therefore, let us welcome the award of the contract but let us not rewrite history in the process.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I will take that—that is about as good as it gets when it comes to the First Minister supporting decisions by the UK Government.

The award of the contract represents a massive boost to Scottish shipbuilding, and it is possible only because we are part of the United Kingdom. [

Interruption

.] Scottish National Party members do not like it, but an investment of such a scale in engineering and manufacturing jobs would not be possible if the SNP got its way. If the nationalists ever managed to separate Scotland from the rest of the UK, these Royal Navy ships would almost certainly be built elsewhere and the highly skilled Scottish jobs lost.

Members should not just take our word for it. Earlier this week, we heard from Keith Hartley, who is a professor of economics and a defence expert. He has advised the United Nations, the European Commission and the European Defence Agency. He said:

“I don’t see a future for a Scottish warship building industry in an independent Scotland.”

First Minister, he is right, is he not?

The First Minister

Before I go on to the detail of that, I will make a general point that I have made before in the chamber. If Douglas Ross wants to have a debate about the benefits or—as he would see it—otherwise of independence, I would really welcome that. Let us have that debate and then let us let the people of Scotland decide the outcome in a referendum.

If Douglas Ross was really confident in his arguments, he would have the courage to have that debate not just in the safety of the parliamentary debating chamber, but out there, in towns, villages and communities all over Scotland.

I believe that the expertise and the skills of our shipbuilders on the River Clyde are world class, and I believe that they would compete successfully for work across the world, regardless of the constitutional future of Scotland. That is the confidence that I have in our shipbuilding industry.

Before Douglas Ross tries to argue against that, I point out in relation to some of the work that was announced this week for Harland & Wolff, for example, that, at one point, the UK Government intended to hand all of that overseas and to complete the contract internationally. Therefore, the point has been made on that matter.

Of course, an independent Scotland, like independent countries all over the world, would, as a full member of NATO, have naval capabilities of its own—capabilities that could and would be served and improved on by our world-renowned shipbuilding industry and expertise. The difference between me and Douglas Ross is that I have confidence in our industry in all circumstances—he clearly does not.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

So, who should the public trust on the economics of shipbuilding—a First Minister who cannot build a single ferry for £250 million or a defence expert who has advised the United Nations?

Of course, the First Minister has to deny the facts, because the independence movement is sinking—it is absolutely sinking. [

Interruption

.] She is up separation creek without a paddle. We know that there would not be any major ships built if she got her way.

Let us look at the First Minister’s appalling record on failing to build essential ferries for Scotland’s island communities. The UK Government has delivered seven ships in Scotland during Nicola Sturgeon’s time as First Minister. How many has the SNP Scottish Government delivered over the same period?

The First Minister

Douglas Ross regularly and rightly challenges me on the delay to the delivery of the ferries, but he should perhaps be careful what he wishes for in the exchange that we are having today. On the vessels that he is lauding and that I have welcomed the announcements on, back in 2013, the UK Government said that the first of those vessels would come into service around 2020. Earlier this month, it was reported that the first type 26 will not come into service until October 2028. That is eight years after the proposed date. [

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

The First Minister

There we go, on timescales.

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear one another, please.

The First Minister

Let us turn to costs. The Secretary of State for Defence, Ben Wallace, has said that, over the lifetime of the programme, the cost will be £233 million more than was forecast. Perhaps Douglas Ross should turn some of these questions to his colleagues south of the border if he wants to come here and make a big issue of these things in the chamber.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Answer the question.

The First Minister

I have just answered the question. Douglas Ross asked me about delays in costs. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

The First Minister

I think that I have just answered his question pretty fully.

I have two final points to make. First, if Douglas Ross really believed what he just said about Scotland’s independence movement, he would be desperate for an independence referendum. The fact that he is running scared of an independence referendum proves him wrong.

Secondly, I welcome the announcements this week for the Clyde, but it is a fact that most people across Scotland and, indeed, the UK who are watching television right now will be watching the chancellor on his feet in the House of Commons announcing significant, deep, real-terms cuts and tax rises. That is the price of a Tory Government, and that is why an increasing number of people in Scotland want this country to be independent. [

Applause

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Anyone who is watching the chancellor’s autumn statement will look at what that is delivering rather than the narrative from the fibbing First Minister, who has been caught out many times. The narrative from the chancellor today is about a UK Government that is increasing benefits and pensions in line with inflation, increasing spending on health and education, delivering £1.5 billion of extra support to Scotland, and investing in the future of our economy.

The First Minister had a very long narrative but zero answers. What I am desperate for in the chamber is, finally, an answer from Nicola Sturgeon. She did not answer the question because her Government has delivered one ferry in the same time in which the UK Government has delivered seven warships. That is seven warships compared with one ferry. The UK Government will now build another five frigates in Scotland, but we do not know when the SNP will complete and deliver a ferry.

The SNP’s failure is having a real impact on people and livelihoods throughout Scotland.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Really?

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Yes, really. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Excuse me, but I am simply not having members shouting at one another across the aisles. Can we please hear one another when we are speaking?

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government is not just shouting at me; she is shouting at the island communities, which are crying out for support from the First Minister and the Government.

Before I was interrupted by the cabinet secretary, I was going to say that half of Highlands and Islands businesses have said that ferry cancellations are posing a risk to their future. Just this week, we have heard from islanders who are again enduring food shortages. The First Minister might not want to admit that her shipbuilding record has sunk the case for independence, but will she at least accept that her Government’s failure to replace lifeline ferries is doing massive damage to our island communities?

The First Minister

I have said on many occasions that the impact on our island communities of the delays to the ferries is deeply regrettable, which is why the Government, with Ferguson’s shipyard, is putting so much focus on delivering the ferries.

When Douglas Ross comes to the chamber and lauds five type 26 frigates, he is right to do so—I have welcomed that announcement—but, before trying to make a comparison with ferries, he probably should have reflected on the fact that the first of those type 26 vessels will come into service eight years after it was planned to do so and at a significant cost overrun. If he wants to trade these things, he should at least understand the facts that he is basing his arguments on.

I have already talked about the impact on our island communities, and I repeat that, but what is having a significant impact on the lives and the livelihoods of people across Scotland is what the Chancellor of the Exchequer is currently setting out in the House of Commons. If Douglas Ross wants to talk about the interruption to food supplies across the whole of the UK that has been caused by Brexit, perhaps we might focus on that—[

Interruption

.]—or on the £55 billion black hole at the heart of the UK finances, caused largely by a combination of Brexit and Tory economic mismanagement, which the chancellor has just said is being filled by tax rises and spending cuts—more than half of it by spending cuts. Budgets for this Government, set at a time when inflation was 3 per cent, are now being eroded by inflation at more than 10 per cent, which is having a devastating impact on people, businesses and public services across our country—

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, First Minister.

The First Minister

When we consider all of that, Presiding Officer, it is no wonder at all that Douglas Ross did not want to come to this chamber and talk about any of the harm that the Conservatives are doing to people across Scotland.

The Presiding Officer

Before we move to question 2, I advise members that I would prefer it if members would please avoid language that suggests that other members are being deliberately untruthful.

General Practitioners (Vacancies)

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. This week, the British Medical Association in Scotland sounded an alarm about the state of GP practices across the country. The BMA says that practices are struggling with vacancies and that GPs are

“exhausted, burnt out and cannot see the light at the end of the tunnel”.

People across the country are sick of phone lines ringing out when they call their GP first thing in the morning. Does the First Minister agree with BMA Scotland and accept its criticism that this Government is not doing enough to tackle the GP crisis?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I will come on in a second to what we are doing to tackle the situation with GP services, in particular, but I accept what the BMA says about the pressure on our GPs. The national health service as a whole is under very significant pressure—greater pressure, perhaps, than at any time in the history of the NHS. That is true for those who work in our acute sector and it is also true for those who work in primary care, including GPs, so I absolutely accept those comments from the BMA.

That, of course, is exactly why—starting from a base where we already have proportionately higher staffing in the NHS in Scotland than in other parts of the United Kingdom, and proportionately higher funding for our NHS—we have a target of recruiting 800 additional GPs in headcount terms over the next few years. So far, since 2017, we have recruited 277 of them.

In addition to that, we are supporting the wider primary care team. In recent times, we have recruited over 3,000 primary care multidisciplinary team members to help with the pressure on GPs, and NHS Pharmacy First Scotland has provided almost 3 million consultations across its network. We continue to take action to support not only GPs but the wider teams in which GPs operate, and it is right and proper that we do so.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister says that more GPs are being recruited and that she is listening to what the BMA has to say about the pressures that GPs face, but she is clearly not listening to what the BMA has to say about the recruitment crisis that we have in the national health service, which predates the pandemic. She talks about the 277 new GPs who have been recruited; the BMA is saying that we are 1,000 GPs short right now. That means unbearable pressure on existing GPs, and it means that many patients are unable to access a GP.

On the First Minister’s target of 800 additional GPs, we are well short. The BMA has made it clear that missing the target would be

“disastrous for Scotland and our patients.”

At the same time, the First Minister has decided to cut the budget for primary care by £65 million. That cut means taking away the ability to recruit the health professionals that GP practices need to support their patients. Dr Buist says that the cut:

“threatens to undermine practices, at the exact moment when we should be doing the opposite”.

Will the First Minister reverse the cut, truly listen to the BMA and support Scotland’s NHS staff?

The First Minister

Those are important issues. I will address the budgetary issue first. I do not like the budget situation that the Scottish Government faces, but the hard reality is that, this year, our budget has been eroded to the tune of £1.7 billion because of inflation. Our budget is effectively fixed: we have no levers to increase the revenue that is available to us within this financial year, so we have to make very difficult decisions. We have been open with the chamber about those decisions and, if any member thinks that we should make different ones, they can put the case to us. What they cannot do is magic up more money for this financial year.

That is the reality that Anas Sarwar’s colleagues in Wales openly recognise. They are facing tough decisions as well and are making clear that, without additional funding from the UK Government, tough decisions are inescapable. That is the reality that we face: none of us likes it, but we cannot escape it.

We have more GPs per head of population than other parts of the UK do, but we want to grow our GP workforce, which is why the target that I have spoken about and the progress that has been made against it is so important—as is the redesign and reform work that we are doing that relates to wider primary care teams. None of those things is easy. All of us acutely understand their impact on patients and the pressure on our NHS.

We will continue to support people who work in our national health service, and we will try to recruit from overseas as much as we can, which is something that Labour, inexplicably, seems to have set its face against. We will continue to take steps to support our NHS during these tough times, because that is what it deserves and what the people of Scotland expect from us.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister wants to pretend that she has not been in government for 15 years and that she has not been in charge of setting the NHS’s budget for 15 years. Those problems predate the challenges with the budget and the inflation crisis. I recognise that there is an inflation crisis, which is why, when the Deputy First Minister set out the emergency budget review in the chamber two months ago, we said that we would work constructively with the Government if it opened the books. It has failed to do so; it would rather hide and play politics than do right by the people of Scotland.

Those decisions have consequences. The Deputy First Minister called the £65 million cut for GP practices, which are already short staffed and under pressure, a “reprioritisation”. Let us call it what it is: a cut that is having devastating consequences for staff and patients. At the same time that he is cutting funds for GP practices, the health secretary is telling people to go to their GP instead of going to accident and emergency. That is another case of the SNP telling NHS staff to do more with less, leaving patients waiting longer to be seen, diagnosed and treated.

The SNP has been in charge of our NHS for 15 years and there is a crisis in every part of it: our GP practices, our accident and emergency departments and our hospitals. Staff are crying out for help and patients are dying. Does the First Minister accept that it is the worst it has ever been, all happening on her and Humza Yousaf’s watch?

The First Minister

Nothing that I have said today, or at any time, takes away from the fact that the management of the NHS is a responsibility of mine and of my Government. I accept that absolutely and I take that responsibility seriously. Is the pressure on the NHS greater than it has been at any time in its history? Yes, it is—and I think that I said that myself earlier. The pressure that the NHS faces has been significantly exacerbated by the pandemic, but there are other factors at play, such as the changing demographic of our population. Governments have to work through those significant challenges.

The fact of the matter is that, although management of the NHS is our responsibility, the amount that we are able to invest in the national health service is determined by funding decisions that are taken at Westminster—funding decisions of the kind that are being set out in the House of Commons as we speak.

Labour’s health minister in Wales has said:

“the fact is our hands are tied by the amount of money that we get from the UK Government, and that’s the situation we’re in.”

How is it that Labour in Wales recognises that, but Labour in Scotland is blind to the reality, because it is so thirled to defending the Conservatives at the expense of setting out the reality?

On primary care funding, the primary care improvement fund has still increased in value to £170 million.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Open the books!

The First Minister

We have opened the books. The Deputy First Minister has made two statements setting out the savings that we are required to make to balance our books because of inflation.

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, First Minister.

The First Minister

Anybody can say that we should do things differently, but they cannot deny the reality. Even within that reality, Scotland has proportionately higher funding for our national health service than have other parts of the UK—including Wales, where Labour is in government—and Scotland has higher staffing levels. That is the measure of the priority that this Government gives, and always will give, to the national health service.

The Presiding Officer

I intend to take general and supplementary questions after question 6. I ask members who have pressed their request-to-speak buttons for a supplementary to please not re-press their buttons. However, members who want to ask a supplementary to questions 4 to 6 should please press their buttons at the relevant point.

Cabinet (Meetings)

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

3. To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. (S6F-01528)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Tuesday.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

We see the cost of Conservative incompetence measured out in the budget today, which will be punishing for families and public services alike. Those on the lowest incomes are most exposed. That includes many who work in our social care sector, but the First Minister is asking all of them to wait four years for the wrong solution. Organisations are now lining up to condemn the creation of the deceptively named national care service; this week, Barnardo’s was the latest organisation to warn that the huge spend that will be required risks diverting resources from front-line services.

Such organisations are right—the cost of this vast and unnecessary bureaucracy is up to £1.3 billion already and is rising, and that is before Scottish ministers trigger a massive VAT bill through centralisation. If the First Minister has £1 billion to spare, every care worker in Scotland can think of better ways to spend it.

Will she withdraw the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill today and put the money for it into services and staff?

The First Minister

As is his right, Alex Cole-Hamilton has opposed the national care service since before parliamentary scrutiny began. That is his position, but he should not stand up here and say that he takes it because of comments that have been made in the course of parliamentary scrutiny so far. We will listen and are listening carefully to comments, and it is important that we allow the scrutiny process to continue.

The national care service is about ending the postcode lottery in adult social care, which I think all of us accept is not acceptable. It is also about better valuing those who work in our social care system. That is what we want to do, and we will of course listen to the comments that are made during parliamentary scrutiny of the bill.

In the meantime, we will continue to take action to address the challenges in social care. We have committed to increasing the spend on social care by 25 per cent by the end of the parliamentary session, and we are increasing the wages of those who work in social care. We will continue to take that action, as we will continue to progress the bill through Parliament, while listening carefully to the comments that are made along the way.

Autumn Budget Statement (Impact)

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government anticipates the impact will be on Scotland of today’s autumn statement. (S6F-01522)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The chancellor had only really begun to go into the detail of his statement when I left the office to come to the chamber, so I have not yet seen all the detail. We will assess the impact fully, but it is clear from what we know and from what the chancellor indicated before getting to his feet today that the United Kingdom Government is repeating the mistakes of the past. It appears to be reintroducing austerity, which does not work and will have significant consequences for people, businesses and public services.

The plans are likely to worsen the extreme pressures that are already being faced as a result of inflation and rising interest rates. We have called for an alternative approach that avoids prolonging the recession that the Bank of England forecasts—I understand that the Office for Budget Responsibility confirmed today that the UK is currently in recession. I hope that that alternative approach is listened to.

The UK is almost unique among wealthier countries in reintroducing austerity. It is the wrong approach and it will have a significantly adverse impact on people and public services across Scotland.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

On the morning of the most recent disastrous Tory budget, former Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, told the

Financial Times

that

“in 2016 the British economy was 90 per cent the size of Germany’s. Now it is less than 70 per cent.”

Following that budget, £65,000 million—almost £1,000 for every person in the UK—was needed to stop a pensions fund collapse. Does the First Minister agree that the economic incompetence of successive UK Governments is why household incomes have languished since 2008 and failed to keep pace with inflation, as we face rising taxes and swingeing cuts to public spending? Can she advise us of the alternative to UK stagnation that will deliver a more prosperous, equal and fair Scotland?

The First Minister

Kenny Gibson is absolutely right to talk about the impact of Tory mismanagement. From the chancellor today, we are hearing about tax rises and spending cuts. According to the chancellor, more than half of the black hole will be filled by spending cuts, which will have a significant impact on public services, including the national health service.

We know that, although global factors are at play, much of that stagnation is caused by UK-specific factors. Brexit is a long-term and permanent drag on the UK economy; its effects are catastrophic. Of course, Tory mismanagement through the mini-budget—which the Scottish Conservatives now like to pretend never happened—is exacerbating that impact. People, businesses and public services are paying the price for all of that.

Finally, the alternative to Tory mismanagement of our economy is self-management of our economy, otherwise known as independence.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

As the First Minister has pointed out, research has proven that, far from working, the UK Government austerity programme after the 2008 financial crisis resulted in one of the lengthiest and slowest recoveries, but the UK Government seems determined to repeat the same mistakes.

Does the First Minister agree that, given that economic evidence proves that smaller, independent states recover best, the only sensible choice is to follow their path and gain full control of our economy?

The First Minister

I absolutely agree. Right now, we are experiencing what happens when we allow others to take decisions for us instead of taking those decisions for ourselves.

No matter how the Tories try to dress up today’s statement with all of the spin that they will use, they are reintroducing austerity and they are doing so at a time when our public services have not yet properly recovered from the last period of Tory austerity. That is the reality, and the Conservatives cannot deny that.

Of course, countries across the world go through difficult times, and some of these issues are global, but most countries do better when they control their own destinies and future. That, too, will be true when Scotland becomes independent.

Domestic Abuse Register

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government supports the introduction of a domestic abuse register. (S6F-01534)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I am aware of the consultation on a proposed domestic abuse bill and I confirm that, when the consultation has concluded, we will consider any proposals that would further our commitment to do more to support victims of domestic abuse. Of course, it will be important to look at how proposals would interlink with implementation of our equally safe strategy for preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. Certainly, we are open minded to any reasonable proposals that come forward.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

The consultation for my bill, which would introduce a domestic abuse register, closes on Monday. The proposed bill would help to protect victims of that appalling crime. I will give an example: I have spoken to one woman who told me that she suffered numerous acts of violence and awful physical abuse for years. Her abuser has allegedly attacked five other women, and she believes that my proposed bill could have prevented some of those women from going through a horrific ordeal. Will the First Minister agree to meet me and that brave woman to hear why a domestic abuse register is necessary?

The First Minister

Of course, we will listen to and meet, when appropriate, anybody who wants to make such suggestions, and I absolutely understand that somebody who is in that situation would consider that such a proposal would make a difference.

The justice secretary met Pam Gosal, I believe at the end of August, to discuss the launch of the consultation on her proposed domestic abuse bill. We will consider the proposals in the consultation when the consultation has closed, which will happen shortly, and when they have been properly analysed. We are open minded to that.

The Police Scotland disclosure scheme for domestic abuse is in place right now. It has an important impact, but absolutely none of us should be complacent about domestic abuse or the need to do more to protect victims and potential victims of domestic abuse.

I hope that the member will take my comments in the spirit in which they are intended, which is to signify a genuinely open mind. We have a number of initiatives in place, many of them under the ambit of the equally safe strategy, which are about protecting women and girls. We need to consider carefully any proposals to ensure that they fit with that, but our minds are open and we will have further discussions as appropriate.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Almost 80 per cent of women prisoners in Scotland have a history of significant head injury, mostly through domestic abuse. The University of Glasgow research has shown that 66 per cent of female inmates have suffered repeat head injuries for many years, and 89 per cent of participants said that domestic violence was the most common cause. It is concerning that many of those women might return to their abusers on release from prison. What further action can the Scottish Government take on the specific issue of female prisoners who have a history of being a victim of domestic abuse, while they are in prison and, importantly, when they are released from prison?

The First Minister

I am happy to give further consideration to that point and to look carefully at the research that underpins Pauline McNeill’s question. I think that it is the case—and that it is well understood—that many women who are in prison will be the victims of abuse and will be vulnerable in many respects. There are similar vulnerabilities for many men who are in prison as well, but we are, rightly, focusing on the issue of women right now.

The number of women in prison has reduced over recent years, and we want to see that trend continue so that those who offend are treated appropriately. The points about the support for women who have suffered domestic abuse while they are in prison and also upon their release are important, so I undertake to give the points that Pauline McNeill has raised today proper consideration and come back to her once we have had the opportunity to do so.

“Health Inequalities in Scotland”

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the report “Health Inequalities in Scotland” by the Fraser of Allander Institute. (S6F-01535)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The report confirms what I suspect most of us already know, which is that socioeconomic inequalities drive wider inequalities. That is exactly why this Government is using the powers and resources that we have to tackle that within the limits in which we operate. We are doing that in a range of ways—through social security, including the Scottish child payment; the provision of free childcare, free school meals, concessionary travel and free prescriptions; and investment in affordable housing.

We are doing that—this is just a statement of fact—with one hand tied behind our backs and without the full powers to tackle poverty while we are shackled to a Westminster system and a Tory Government that has caused economic chaos and savage reductions in real terms in our budget. I hope that we will hear something different today from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but, as I said earlier, I fear that the continued or reintroduced austerity that we are hearing about today will deepen those impacts, while strengthening the case for more of those decisions and powers to lie in the hands of this Parliament.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

This week’s report confirmed that almost half of Scotland

’s personal wealth is owned by just 10 per cent of households and that there is a direct link between extreme wealth inequality and health inequality. Does the First Minister accept that the Scottish Government has the power to redistribute land ownership and wealth but has not used that power; that the Scottish Government has the power to abolish the regressive council tax, introduce a land value tax and make land and buildings transaction taxes much more progressive, but has failed to do so; and that a wealth tax, set and administered by the Scottish Parliament through an order of council, could be pursued, but she has decided not to? When will the First Minister use the tax powers that the Scottish Government has got to reduce Scotland’s extreme inequalities of wealth and fund our public services properly and progressively?

The First Minister

I agree with a lot of what Richard Leonard has said. I suspect that I agree with more of it than Anas Sarwar does; his face has been pretty impassive as Richard Leonard has recounted all those policies, which I suspect are not Scottish Labour policies.

The fact of the matter is that, with the very limited—[

Interruption

.] If it is Scottish Labour’s policy to replace the council tax with a land value tax, I will be happy to hear that and to hear the detail of that. However, the fact of the matter is that—with our limited tax powers, of course—we have a more progressive system of tax. Our income tax, which is the tax over which we have our main tax power, although it is far too limited in terms of the overall suite of tax powers, means that, if you earn more in Scotland, you pay slightly more, and if you earn the least, then you pay slightly less tax than you would elsewhere in the United Kingdom.

If Richard Leonard wants us to be able to consider and introduce a wealth tax, he really needs to argue for the powers to lie in this Parliament to do exactly that. We will always favour progressive taxation, but we need more powers over taxation in this Parliament to give effect to that.

What we have done this week is both increase the value of and extend the reach of the unique Scottish child payment, putting money directly into the pockets of those who are at the lowest end of the income spectrum and lifting children out of poverty. That is a shining example of how we can use powers when we have powers in the hands of this Parliament.

The Presiding Officer

We move to supplementary questions.

Scottish Child Payment

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

As the First Minister has just mentioned, the Scottish child payment has been increased to £25 and extended to under-16s this week. That has been described as a watershed moment by anti-poverty campaigners. However, does the First Minister share my frustration that, although the Scottish Government is using the limited powers that it has to support people, those efforts are frequently undermined by the actions of the United Kingdom Tory Government?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes. That is not just a matter of opinion; it is a matter of fact. While we are putting £25 a week per child into the pockets of the lowest-income families, a Tory Government is in power that not long ago took £20 a week away from the poorest through the clawback of the universal credit uplift. That is just a fact. We will continue to act to use the powers that we have.

This week was a watershed moment. That child payment does not exist anywhere else in the UK, and it is an example of what can be done when we prioritise lifting children out of poverty and investing in their future. As anti-poverty campaigners have said this week, if the Scottish Government can do that, why on earth cannot the UK Government follow suit?

War Memorials (Vandalism)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

In the early hours of Monday morning, a war memorial in front of the City of Edinburgh Council was vandalised in what was a mindless act and an appalling insult to our fallen war heroes. It has shocked and angered the local community in Edinburgh, and I hope that those who are responsible will be held to account in due course. Sadly, however, attacks on war memorials are increasing in Scotland. That is why my Scottish Conservative colleague Meghan Gallacher is bringing forward a bill to impose tougher penalties on those who attack and deface war memorials. Will the First Minister agree to consider Scottish Conservative proposals on this issue? What update can she provide on the investigation of Monday’s incident?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, we will consider any proposals that are brought forward. I have not seen the detail of those proposals yet, but when they appear, we will give them due consideration. That is certainly important to do.

With regard to the attack on the war memorial in Edinburgh, less than 24 hours before that despicable attack took place, I, among others, was privileged to lay a wreath at that war memorial in remembrance of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in service of their country and to allow us to enjoy the freedoms that we take for granted today.

What happened in the early hours of Monday morning is almost beyond words—absolutely despicable, sickening and disgusting. It is beyond my comprehension—I am sure that it is beyond the comprehension of any of us in the chamber—how anybody could attack a war memorial at any time of the year, but particularly just hours after remembrance Sunday. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on an on-going police investigation; obviously, that is for the police to take forward. Where I will end these remarks, in agreement with the member, is that I really hope that those who are responsible for that despicable attack are identified and face the full force of justice.

World Cup (Human Rights)

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

On Sunday, international teams will begin to compete for the biggest prize in world football, but they will do so in a state that denies the rights of LGBT+ people, suppresses the rights of women and has demonstrated quite clearly that it has no regard for the lives or wellbeing of migrant workers. Only a few weeks ago, Qatar’s world cup ambassador branded being gay as “damage in the mind”.

Senior figures of the Scottish Football Association will be attending world cup events on the day the tournament kicks off. LGBT+ people, many of whom are passionate football fans, our allies in stands across the country, the tartan army, the Scottish Trades Union Congress and Zander Murray of Gala Fairydean Rovers, of whom I think we should all be immensely proud, have voiced concern and disapproval about this world cup and have called on the SFA to think again.

The SFA has said that it is

“supportive of all measures to improve human rights conditions in Qatar”,

but does the First Minister believe that members of our football governing body attending this world cup can send any other message than a validation of the human rights record of Qatar, and what message does she think that it sends to LGBT+ people, in particular, in Scotland?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, as the world cup gets under way later this week in Qatar, I think that it is a really important moment for all of us, regardless of party or anything else that might divide us, to stand in solidarity with the LGBT+ community in Scotland, in the United Kingdom, in Europe and right across the world. I hope that that will unite all of us.

The attendance or otherwise of SFA officials is a matter for the SFA. Governments should not intervene in decisions that sports governing bodies take, but I would certainly hope that anybody attending the world cup in Qatar in any capacity will take the opportunity to express solidarity with our LGBT+ community. I think that, over the next few weeks, it is even more important than sport that we take the opportunity to stand up for human rights and the dignity of those in that community, and that we unite around that sentiment today and right throughout the period of the competition in Qatar.

Department for Work and Pensions (Sanctions)

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

Figures published this week show that the number of young Scots aged 18 to 24 sanctioned by the Department for Work and Pensions has nearly doubled since 2019. That is more than 2,500 young people being denied vital support in the midst of a cost of living crisis. Does the First Minister share my view that that is immoral and that the welfare system should be there to support people, not penalise them?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Yes, I do. Natalie Don is absolutely right to raise the issue. Those figures are really alarming. They are DWP figures and they show that the universal credit sanction rate is more than double the pre-pandemic level, with more than 42,000 sanctions being applied across all claims in July this year. The data also shows that sanctions are applied most to young people between the ages of 18 and 24. Despite substantial evidence showing that sanctions simply do not work and that they have long-term detrimental effects, the United Kingdom Government’s sanctions policy is pushing more people into hardship and doing that during a cost of living crisis.

I take the opportunity to call on the UK Government to urgently review its sanctions policy along with the other punitive policies within the universal credit system such as the five-week wait, the two-child limit and the benefit cap, and to focus instead on supporting people rather than punishing them when they are already struggling so much.

Forth Valley Hospital

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The First Minister will be aware of the difficulties that are being faced by Forth Valley hospital, with five consultants leaving in the space of two weeks and the facility being described as a “war zone” and a “toxic” environment. The health board says that any concerns raised by clinical or other staff groups are taken seriously and that there is no attempt to cover up, but the reality is that I continue to have to make representations to the board as further whistleblowers come forward seeking assistance. They are saying that the culture within the hospital regarding bullying continues and that there is no meaningful change by the senior management.

That is, frankly, a shocking situation to occur in any hospital, so what action can be put in place to ensure that the facility is safe and fit for purpose?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The safety of any hospital is paramount, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is engaged fully on those issues.

I will make two points: first, when a whistleblower raises concern, that concern must be treated with the utmost seriousness and thoroughly investigated. Secondly, the chief operating officer of NHS Scotland has met NHS Forth Valley’s chief executive to discuss the concerns that were raised.

The Scottish Government is supporting Forth Valley to develop a robust and cohesive action plan for improvement, and a national planning and performance oversight group met earlier this month to discuss the next steps. I know that the health secretary will continue to keep members updated.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s question time.

Points of Order

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. On Tuesday 15 November, I asked minister Lorna Slater:

“When did ministers first become aware that they were using a figure that, to quote Scottish Government officials, had not ‘been properly sourced’?”

She responded that

“ministers became aware of the issue on Tuesday 8 November”.—[

Official Report

, 15 November 2022; c 6.]

Emails that are in the public domain reveal that civil servants wrote to at least two ministers in October 2020, saying that, to their knowledge,

“the 25 per cent estimate has never ... been properly sourced”.

Therefore, the information that minister Slater provided to Parliament two days ago does not, apparently, accord with the facts. Parliament has been misled, again.

On Tuesday, I also quoted section 1.3.(c) of the ministerial code, which is on how ministers who mislead Parliament should respond. To the best of my knowledge, the only correction to the record has been made by the First Minister, after I called her out on her previous use of misleading energy consumption statistics.

Apparently, none of those members who misled Parliament on the 25 per cent claim have acted. This Government appears to hold the ministerial code and the honour and privilege of office in utter disdain. The implications of ministers consistently and brazenly misleading Parliament are huge, as are the implications of ministers not acting in accordance with the ministerial code after having done so.

Presiding Officer, I am concerned that a perceived lack of integrity by Scottish ministers in not abiding by our processes and codes risks bringing the Parliament into disrepute and undermining your position as Presiding Officer. Is there any way, therefore, that you can preserve the trust that is placed in us in this Parliament by ensuring that Government ministers abide by all aspects of the ministerial code, particularly section 1.3.(c)?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you. The member will be aware that the ministerial code is a matter for the Scottish Government, but it is clearly of paramount importance that members, including ministers, give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity.

I believe that members are fully aware that the Parliament has a corrections procedure and of how that works. The current mechanism that is available to me through standing orders reflects the procedures and practices that Parliament itself has agreed. If there is a view that they should be revisited, the matter should be raised with the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance on the procedures around correcting the

Official Report

after what we have just heard from Liam Kerr, which is, frankly, astonishing. The energy minister at the time and the current

Minister for Business, Trade, Tourism and Enterprise were informed in 2020 that that statistic of 25 per cent had no basis. It is important that Parliament gets the proper facts.

At the same topical question time exchange on Tuesday 15 November, the minister, Lorna Slater, said:

“The figure relating to Scotland having 25 per cent of Europe’s offshore wind potential was first set out in a 2010 publication, and it is now outdated.”—[

Official Report

, 15 November; c 6.]

The First Minister’s spokespeople have also said that it was

“quoted accurately at the time”.

How can the Scottish Government confidently say that the figure was correct in 2010 when it was told by civil servants in 2020 that it had not “been properly sourced”? Quite simply, nobody knows where the figure came from. In truth, the statistic has always been make-believe, but to suggest that it is outdated would sound to any reasonable person as though it had been true at some point. I am concerned that, in an attempt to excuse the original falsehoods, the Government is now creating fresh falsehoods to cover its tracks.

Presiding Officer, I seek your guidance on what mechanisms exist to correct the record on whether you have been approached by the Government on the point that, rather than being outdated, the statistic was never accurate to begin with.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Cole-Hamilton for his point of order, but I have already ruled on the issue in my response to Liam Kerr. The procedures that are in place have previously been agreed by this Parliament. The corrections mechanism exists, and I am sure that members understand what it is. Mr Cole-Hamilton has made his points on the record.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

On Tuesday, you provided a statement to the Parliament in response to a woman being ejected because of the colours of her scarf. You apologised and explained that it had been an “error”, but we still do not know why that happened to an innocent member of the public. Is any form of investigation being done into this sorry episode? A key question is whether any members or parliamentary staff ordered or encouraged security staff to act in that way.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Findlay for his point of order. Some of the matters that he raises are not matters for the standing orders and, therefore, are not matters for me to rule on from the chair. I made my views on the matter very clear in my statement to the Parliament on 15 November, so I refer Mr Findlay to the

Official Report

of that date.

Higher Education Workers Dispute

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-06216, in the name of Katy Clark, on the higher education workers dispute. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak button now or as soon as possible.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes the recent industrial action by university staff following the closure of the UNISON higher education pay ballot on 19 August 2022; further notes that staff at the University of Glasgow, Edinburgh Napier University and Robert Gordon University represented by UNISON, which include cleaners, administrators and library, catering and security workers, most recently took strike action on 3 and 4 October; understands that the Universities and Colleges Employers Association’s (UCEA) final offer of 3%, or 7.2% for the lowest paid workers, is sub-inflationary as the current CPI rate is 9.9% and the current RPI rate is 12.3%; considers that UCEA’s offer has been imposed on university staff despite being subject to a live dispute with the trade unions, and that such impositions also occurred in 2021 and 2020; understands that the trade unions, University and College Union, Educational Institute of Scotland-University Lecturers’ Association and Unite, are at varying stages of consulting or balloting their members for action in the same dispute; believes that industrial relations in the sector have deteriorated to an unacceptable level; notes the view that the staff do incredible work and deserve to be recognised fairly and paid properly; further notes the belief that the Scottish Government must urge universities and UCEA to take meaningful steps to negotiate a fair resolution to these disputes, and notes the calls on universities and UCEA to return to the negotiating table in the interests of workers and students.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

It is a pleasure to speak to this motion on the higher education workers dispute, and I thank all the members who gave the motion cross-party support.

As the motion notes, several universities have already had strike action in recent months, and many more staff across the country are currently being balloted. The most recent Unison strike took place on 4 October, when Unison members—mainly cleaners, administrators and library, catering, security and other support staff—took part in action. Further action is due to take place on dates later this month at Edinburgh Napier University, Glasgow Caledonian University and Robert Gordon University.

Those workers will be joined by members of the Educational Institute of Scotland-University Lecturers Association and of the University and College Union, who all have strike dates in November. The UCU action will be at every single one of the 17 Scottish institutions, on three dates later this month, and will involve up to 8,000 members.

Further ballots are on-going at many other institutions, including the University of the West of Scotland, in the region that I represent. Unite the union, too, is balloting its 2,000 members across 11 institutions. We therefore face disruption at universities across Scotland, with staff—many of whom are on low pay—taking action despite the loss of income that that will involve for them. In addition, of course, students are being impacted.

University of Glasgow members were also on strike but, earlier this month, they accepted a breakthrough pay deal, which will involve overall pay rises of between 6 and 12.9 per cent this year, and a pay increase of £2,332 for the lowest paid.

However, the Universities and Colleges Employers Association says that it has made its final offer to staff, of a below-inflation pay award of 3 per cent for most higher education workers, and a 3 to 9 per cent award for some of the lowest paid. Given the rate of inflation, those are pay decreases in real terms.

The strikes are about pay, but they are also about other terms and conditions. The UCU held two ballots: one for strikes on pay and conditions; and the other for strikes on pensions. In the pay and conditions ballot, 81.1 per cent voted yes, on a 57.8 per cent turnout. In the pensions ballot, the yes vote was higher, at 84 per cent, on a 60.2 per cent turnout.

The UCU says that, on average, the cuts to pensions are in the region of 35 per cent, and that those are going ahead despite being based on an outdated valuation of the pension fund. The UCU also estimates that, in the jobs in which it organises in the sector, pay has been cut by about 25 per cent in real terms since 2009. Unison estimates that, for its members, the cut has been about 20 per cent during the same time period.

About one third of university staff in Scotland and across the United Kingdom are on precarious, fixed-term contracts. Some of those workers have been on those contracts for upwards of 30 years.

The average working week in education is now more than 50 hours, and UCU Scotland says that, in a survey that it conducted in June 2021, 76 per cent of respondents reported an increase in workload during the pandemic. A further, more recent UCU survey, from March this year, found that two thirds were considering leaving the sector due to poor pay and conditions.

In response to debates of this nature, Scottish ministers normally say that the institutions are independent and that the terms and conditions of the staff are not the responsibility of the Scottish Government. However, the Scottish Government provided more than £1 billion in funding to Scottish universities last year. Those institutions are substantially funded by the Government.

In addition, the sector generates income. The UK university sector generated income of £14.1 billion last year.

It is estimated that vice-chancellors took pay packets of an estimated £45 million. For example, the principal of the University of Edinburgh is reported to have a salary of an estimated £363,000 a year, and the principal of the University of Glasgow is reported to have an estimated salary of £368,000 a year.

Education is fully devolved and the Scottish Government is responsible for the model in our higher education system in Scotland, which is one of endemic low pay, poor conditions, excessive executive remuneration, casualised contracts and the marketisation of the sector.

I urge the Scottish Government, as a major funder of the sector in Scotland, to get directly involved in these disputes; to urge universities and the University and Colleges Employers Association to take meaningful steps to negotiate a fair resolution to the disputes; to ensure that the fair work convention is the minimum standard for accessing funding from the Scottish Funding Council; and to look at how that convention can be strengthened and, as a priority, investigate and report to this Parliament on employment conditions in the education sector, particularly in higher education.

We have a system in which students are treated as consumers and in which many workers are on temporary contracts and paid a pittance while vice-chancellors award themselves record pay packets. It is unsurprising that workers across the country are demanding improved pay and conditions. The Scottish Government cannot claim to be a bystander in the disputes. The Government funds Scottish universities by more than £1 billion each year. It has a responsibility to ensure that staff are paid well and have proper conditions of employment and that the universities, which are provided with funds, act as good employers.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

As we are all too well aware, industrial disputes are invariably messy, and often unpleasant, affairs. Overambitious, ill-judged and seemingly entrenched positions are taken at the outset, when everyone knows that ground must be, and ultimately will be, ceded by the protagonists.

Right now, with workers in so many employment sectors understandably pressing for pay increases to address spiralling inflation, the landscape for attracting support and sympathy from the public for pay claims is pretty congested. A number of public sector disputes are rumbling away across the United Kingdom and the brutal truth is that sympathy for the likes of nurses and firefighters may be greater than that for university staff. That is absolutely not to say that that group does not deserve a fair but affordable increase that takes account of the cost of living—far from it. It is simply an observation.

Universities do not function and students do not secure an education without cleaners, administrators and library, catering and security workers, never mind the teaching staff. That it is why I am certain that the Scottish Government will actively encourage Scotland’s universities to engage with the unions and to apply fair work principles. However, as Katy Clark acknowledged, universities are autonomous bodies.

Universities must be alive to the public relations damage done to them by protracted disputes with staff, especially where there are parallel issues, such as the pensions issue that is having an impact on non-teaching staff at the University of Dundee.

There is no aspect of industrial relations in which fairness is so much to the fore of the public mind as that of pensions. Because of the background that I came from, I am instinctively inclined towards the cause of employees who oppose threats to their pension expectations. In another life, I worked for 30 years in journalism. It was not just the Maxwell scandal that left its mark: long-serving and far from well-paid journalists saw their non-contributory pension schemes removed while the legitimate terms and conditions of others were labelled as “pension liabilities” as if those were unreasonable burdens and not entitlements after many years of sterling service.

There is not the slightest doubt that the initial approach taken by the University of Dundee to its superannuation scheme was cack-handed, to say the least. It does not look good to attack the pension rights of staff who are far from being the best remunerated in an institution, especially when those staff are predominantly women, the gender worst served by pension provision.

In fairness, I get the university court’s concerns over the growth in pension responsibilities—let us call them that—and the increase in employer contributions. However, that was the kind of ill-judged starting position that I referred to earlier.

We have seen some progress—not as much as staff might want or be content with, but some progress. We now need to see that being built on, with similar momentum taking hold on the salaries front both at Dundee and across the sector and, as I said, both sides recognising that ground will have to be ceded.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I d

eclare an interest as a member of the Universities Superannuation Scheme from my 15 years working in the Scottish higher education sector.

I thank Katy Clark for bringing the motion to the chamber for debate today. As she knows, I am happy to give the full backing of Scottish Labour’s education policy, particularly for the sound recommendation that funding that is delivered from the Scottish taxpayer through the Scottish Funding Council should be guaranteed on the baseline of the fair work convention. The universities should adhere to that. It is a sound suggestion and the minister should address it in his remarks.

It is absolutely right to say that employers should get back round the table on all the disputes that Katy Clark highlighted, and also on the dispute that Mr Graeme Dey highlighted. However, we know that pay disputes across the public sector are being driven by a global economic climate that has, to be frank, only been worsened by the grotesque incompetence of the Conservative Government, which is in Parliament today asking citizens across the UK to pay the cost of its right-wing ideological economic fantasies.

The staff in our universities, whose situation we are debating, are victims of that incompetence, too. The impact of inflation is now compounded by the tax hikes and service cuts that the chancellor has announced in the past hour. We have to ask our universities to recognise that climate and they must strain every sinew to find the resources to strike the right pay deal for our lecturers and support staff across Scotland. Their work is crucial not just today, for the students that they work with, but to the future of our country.

As members have highlighted, industrial relations are strained. As a Dundonian and as a former long-term employee of the University of Dundee, it has become a matter of great concern and, to be frank, a shameful sight to see that industrial relations there have deteriorated to the level that they have. The pension cuts for the lowest paid part of the workforce, who are predominantly female, are completely unacceptable. The management must get round the table with all the campus unions immediately.

We must also recognise in this debate what the Scottish Government has done to increase the budget pressures on our universities. The resource spending review slashed funds for tertiary education in the years to come by 8 per cent with, as yet, no indication of the balance of the cuts between colleges and universities. That means that the universities do not yet know the real scale of the cuts that they will face, which makes planning for their future workforces, projects and investments impossible. The minister should provide clarity on that as soon as possible.

This is not just a short-term issue that has arisen in recent months. The Scottish Government has provided no increase to the funding of Scottish student education for 13 years and, as a result, it is fair to say that the balance sheets of most Scottish universities are deeply worrying. That is reflected in the comparative performance of our universities, as I have covered in the chamber on numerous occasions. The recent research excellence framework results show the universities in Scotland not improving at the pace of universities across the UK.

In the

Times Higher Education

world university rankings that were published just yesterday, there are three outstanding Scottish universities in the world’s top 200. A decade ago, there were five. That is a reflection of the direction of travel in Scotland, which is a very worrying one for the future of our country.

The people who make the universities’ success possible are the very employees whose working conditions we are discussing today. Scottish Labour calls for new negotiations and a deal for all those workers that protects their futures and the future success of Scotland.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I note the contents of the motion, and I find myself broadly in agreement with what is being said, fundamentally, in the debate, which is that the university principals and administrations should get together with the representatives of their workforces and resolve the dispute. At the heart of all these matters are the interests of the generation who depend on the good work that is being done in our universities and colleges, not only for their own individual success but for the future success of our country.

I listened to Michael Marra, for whom I have enormous respect, and I would gently suggest to him that he should perhaps check the detail of what the Chancellor of the Exchequer has actually said and, in particular, the commentary of the Office for Budget Responsibility.

Katy Clark is absolutely right when she talks about education being wholly devolved. Therefore, the minister needs to respond to any issues that we address in the debate around the Government’s performance in relation to its lack of public investment over a decade.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Would the member recognise that, fundamentally, this is an industrial dispute about industrial relations related to matters around pay and terms and conditions, which are inextricably interlinked with employment law, over which we do not have control and which remains in the hands of the UK Government?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I can give you your time back, Mr Kerr.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

It is intrinsically interlinked with the fact that the Scottish Government has been underfunding the further and higher education sector in this country for 10 years. That is the framework in which these issues are being addressed. This is a wholly devolved matter, and the buck stops with the Scottish Government and with the Minister for Higher Education and Further Education, Youth Employment and Training in particular.

The further and higher education sector, upon which we all depend for our future prosperity, needs greater levels of sustainable funding. For far too long, the Scottish National Party Government has neglected the further education and higher education sector. Because of that, there have been budget cuts year after year. There have been cuts to the number of college students across Scotland and a cap on the number of Scots permitted to attend universities. The university sector has had to go across the globe, sometimes involving itself in what I can only describe as dubious international schemes to raise money, potentially undermining the independence and integrity of those very institutions, many of which are world class.

That is contributing to the strikes by lecturers and other staff at Scottish universities and colleges, who are concerned about their pay, working conditions and pensions. Since 2010, university funding per student has fallen by 9.4 per cent in real terms, according to the Scottish Government’s own figures. In response to written question S6W-01165, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills told us that, in 2010-11, average university student funding was £6,525 in real terms, whereas the figure now is £5,703.

The effect of those cuts is clear. As Universities Scotland has made clear, the fact that funding from international students’ fees is set to overtake funding that the Scottish Government makes available to Scotland’s universities next year is evidence of those international students’ fees now cross-subsidising Scottish students’ places and the teaching budgets of higher education institutions.

We have also seen the effect of the SNP spending cuts on Scotland’s colleges. The principal of Glasgow Kelvin College has said that 80 per cent of accessible income or revenue is spent on staff costs.

As I am now running out of time, I will conclude by reiterating that the Scottish Conservatives believe that the university principals—

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

Will the member take an intervention?

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I would love to, but I do not know if I am allowed.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You are winding up at the moment, Mr Kerr.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I apologise—I like to take interventions, as I think members know.

The Scottish Conservatives believe that the university principals and the representatives of university employees need to get around the table, but the Scottish Government needs to take responsibility for the consequences of the decisions that it has made, based on some form of hierarchy of political priorities. Scotland’s universities should be the envy of the world. Our reputation as a country stands on our higher and further education. It is time that the SNP Scottish Government gave proper funding priority to Scotland’s universities and colleges, so that lecturers and staff will feel and share in the pride of being part of this great national success story.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

I refer members to my entry in the register of interests, and I thank my comrade Katy Clark for securing this important debate.

As a former rep for the University and College Union—the UCU—I know all too well what struggles the staff in higher education are facing. For years, those workers have been undervalued as the UK and Scottish Governments have allowed low pay, casualisation and poor working conditions to become rife across the sector. Therefore, I stand with those workers as they take industrial action and join them in their calls for a real pay rise after years of below-inflation wage rises; for an end to precarious contracts, which lead to poor working conditions and dangerously high workloads; and for pensions that allow them to have dignity in retirement, rather than pensions that have been cut to the bone.

As I mentioned, prior to my election, I was a UCU rep. A particular issue that members faced then, which they still face now, was the increasing casualisation of work in higher education. I would like to share some testimony from a UCU member at the University of Dundee that highlights the human impact of casualisation. I will read out their words:

“I have been teaching at universities in the UK for 5 years, teaching English and academic skills to students who want to come and study in the UK.

In that time, I have been on more than 10 temporary contracts—all of them either part-time or fractional.

Most of my students will pay more for their Masters course than I will make in a year. It is just not possible to plan a life under these conditions.

It’s nearly impossible to get a mortgage because temporary contracts are seen as too risky by the bank.

You cannot afford to pay for further training and qualifications because your pay is so low.

Starting a family seems impossible when you don’t know if you will have a contract this semester, or if you might need to move to another city for work.

When I got my first job at a university I was excited because I thought I had ‘made it’.

Now, I would not recommend the HE sector to anyone who wants to start a family or build a stable life of any kind.

I plan to retrain and leave the sector at the next opportunity, and I know I’m not alone.”

The UCU member whose testimony I have shared is not alone. The issues that they face reflect the systemic challenges that university staff face. As we have heard, at the University of Dundee senior management are pushing through pension cuts without holding meaningful negotiations with the affected workers or their trade union representatives in Unite, Unison and the UCU. The Scottish Government has refused to engage, despite the fact that it has often emphasised the importance of fair work. The First Minister, the education ministers and even their officials all failed to meet a delegation of workers and their Unite representatives in Parliament just two weeks ago.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I can only respectfully suggest that such an invitation never made its way to me. I have met the unions that represent workers at the University of Dundee, and I have met and spoken to folk from Dundee on the ground. Therefore, I am sorry to say that what Ms Villalba said is news to me. If that delegation wants to write to me, I will be happy to consider meeting it.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for that intervention and for his commitment to meet the workers. I will pass that on. The invitation was extended to every MSP in Parliament and I raised it at First Minister’s question time. I even gave the time and place. I can only apologise if the minister was not paying attention that day.

Where is the fairness in low pay, in casualised contracts and in the pension cuts that university staff in Dundee and across Scotland now face? How can it be right that universities that receive so much public funding are able to defy the Scottish Government’s fair work principles without being held to account?

The growing marketisation of higher education has involved universities prioritising profit over people. We must think bolder and transform our education system in the way that we transformed public health with the creation of the national health service. That means aspiring to have a national education service that is universally available from cradle to grave, that provides well-paid, secure and unionised jobs for its staff, and that makes lifelong learning a reality for all.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I refer members to my entry in the register of interests, and I thank Katy Clark for bringing this important question back before Parliament.

Once again, we are debating higher education at the very point when our trade unions are on the brink of industrial action. Once again, we are debating higher education as we witness a fierce political attack on the democratic freedoms of workers and their organisations. Make no mistake: it is an attack that is so extreme that simply witnessing it is not enough. This is no time for neutrality; this is a time to step up and actively defend those workers, those trade unions and those fundamental human rights and freedoms.

Nor can we be neutral on the fate of our universities. Just last week, I visited the new advanced research centre at the University of Glasgow. I listened: I listened to university teachers, who told me about the rise in precarious employment. I listened: I listened to students, who told me about the difference that access to higher education was making to their lives, but how hard their struggle was. New capital investment in our university buildings is important, but we also need equally bold new human investment in our university staff and students.

That reminds me that, as we contemplate the aftermath of this afternoon’s budget and as the SNP-Green Government contemplates yet more cuts to college and university funding, we should never forget that there are those who will use financial cuts not as a side effect but as an intended consequence to limit the choice that is open to working-class students.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I rise to point out that the chancellor’s announcements today mean that, from next year, the Scottish Government will have £1.5 billion more to spend on education and on other public services.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

As people always say about budgets, the devil will be in the detail. We shall see over the next few days what that really means on the ground.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

In the accompanying notes for today’s budget, the OBR has reflected the fact that household income in the UK is expected to fall by 7 per cent this year and 7 per cent next year. Is that not the situation that workers in universities face as a result of the UK Government’s economic policies?

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Yes, I agree with Michael Marra entirely. As I was saying, that is also the challenge that faces students from working-class backgrounds, who are much less likely to get the opportunity.

In the time that I have left, let me turn to look at the UCU’s demands, which are, in my view, very modest. All that it is looking for is a meaningful pay rise and action to address pay inequality; an agreed framework to eliminate precarious employment practices and to tackle dangerously high workloads; an entirely affordable reversal of the 35 per cent cut to university workers’ pensions; a reinstatement of the universities pension scheme; and a recognition that those are deferred earnings.

We say to the outstanding leaders of the UCU—Jo Grady and Mary Senior—and to other higher education trade unions in dispute that they and their members have our 100 per cent support. We say to the Scottish Government that of course we understand the importance of the autonomous status of our universities, but they are not private businesses—they are public institutions that are subject to public legislation, influence and regulation, and they are funded with public money. I ask the Minister for Higher Education and Further Education, Youth Employment and Training: what is it going to take, and when is he going to act?

Finally, in our democracy, trade unions are a line of defence for working people, but I hope that the day will come soon when they will be not just a line of defence but an alternative line of advance. I hope that they will be a vehicle through which people can participate in the running of our universities, our colleges and all our public services and, yes, in the running of our industries as well, so that the people who know what works—those who create the wealth, including the wealth of knowledge in our education system—are no longer all the time defending but have their status transformed. That would herald a new era of mutual aid and mutual respect, a new era of social and economic responsibility, and a new era of progress for working people in this country.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I now invite the minister to respond to the debate.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I thank Katy Clark for lodging the motion, which raises important issues that it is entirely appropriate for us to debate in the Parliament.

At the outset, I place on record my thanks to those who work in our universities, be they our lecturing staff or support staff. They keep campuses running smoothly and ensure that students are supported and get the education that they require. In that context, I recognise that the past few years have not been easy for many sectors, including the university sector, in working through the Covid-19 pandemic, so it is all credit to those who have worked in the sector not only that they have they sustained it but that it has continued to be the envy of the world.

I was surprised to hear Stephen Kerr say that the sector “should” be the envy of the world; he should know that we have world-class and outstanding excellence in our universities, and I am sure that Mr Kerr’s suggestion that it might be otherwise, in saying that they “should” be the envy of the world, was inadvertent—they are the envy of the world.

In respect of workforce relations right now, my clear view is that workers in our universities should continue to be supported. That is vitally important. We rely on them to help our institutions to continue to rebuild and bounce back in the post-Brexit and post-Covid economy; to help us to move towards net zero; to respond to the imperatives of upskilling and reskilling; and to continue to deliver world-class teaching, research and knowledge exchange.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

How on earth are those workers going to do that when the SNP Scottish Government is cutting public funding to universities and colleges? For example, on the financial prospectus that the SNP proposes, the principal of Glasgow Kelvin College, Derek Smeall, has said:

“the impact looks at this early stage to be likely to mean a reduction in my workforce of 25 per cent by ... year 5, which is 2027.”—[

Official Report

,

Education, Children and Young People Committee

, 21 September 2022; c 14.]

That is what the SNP has got on offer to the sector, so, although the minister talks about bouncing back, how is the sector supposed to do that when the SNP is not funding it properly?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

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

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

What the member fails to mention—it is important that we place this in its proper context—is that today, as things stand, the Scottish Government’s budget is worth £1.7 billion less than when it was published in December 2021. The framework that we laid out through the spending review is predicated on what we expect to be available to spend through the public purse as a consequence of decisions that have been taken by Mr Kerr’s party in government. That is the reality of what we have to deal with, and we will seek to rise to the occasion and do what we can to continue to support the sector, both universities and colleges, right now.

I heard Katy Clark say—I think that she was saying this positively—that we invest £1 billion in our university sector. To be precise, it is £1.1 billion. That is a substantial investment.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

We all sympathise about the current financial situation, and I addressed some of that in my speech. The minister has to recognise that the amount of money that the Scottish Government has provided for Scottish students has not increased for 13 years. Is that not part of the root cause of the issue of terms and conditions for Scottish workers in universities, which is what we are talking about?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Actually, this year, we have seen an uplift in the teaching grant to universities being delivered through decisions taken by the Scottish Funding Council, so we continue to invest. We will also continue to invest in the substantial package of student support that we have in place, which, of course, enables Scottish students to attend university without having to pay the excessive and exorbitant fees that students in the rest of the United Kingdom have to pay.

Let me return to the industrial dispute, which is, after all, the primary focus of today’s debate. I am sorry if this disappoints Ms Clark, but I will be consistent with what I have said before. It is fundamentally the case that the Scottish Government is not a direct party to the negotiation process. We do not have the ability to intervene directly, or to determine, dictate or participate in how the negotiations will be taken forward.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Will the minister give way?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I will give way in a wee second.

This point is important and has not been looked at or set out by any member thus far. Of course, some disputes are local, such as the Dundee one or the issues at Glasgow. However, for lecturers, the framework for negotiations is not Scotland specific; it is UK wide. That is the context and the reality that we are dealing with. We will seek to continue to influence matters and to engage, but against that reality.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Does the minister accept that the model for the higher education sector in Scotland is, as I outlined, one of endemic low pay, poor conditions, excessive executive remuneration, casualised contracts and marketisation? Does he accept that it is the Scottish Government’s responsibility to ensure that the model is acceptable to the people of Scotland? Will he look at fair work and at how employment practices can be improved in the sector?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Of course, I accept the responsibility that we have to bring our influence to bear to improve on those matters. I recognise that there are issues not only in this sector but right across the labour market in terms of how it is structured. I remind Ms Clark that, fundamentally, many of those things come back to employment law and how the labour market is regulated more widely, which is not directly in our gift.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Will the minister give way?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I have given way a number of times.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister has taken a number of interventions. It is only reasonable to listen to his responses and not provide a running commentary on them.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I assure you that the running commentary has not put me off my stride, Presiding Officer, but I appreciate the sentiment.

Let me come back to the process of negotiation. I accept that there is a role; I am not trying to abdicate that responsibility. I have sought to engage at every turn with the institutions, through Universities Scotland, and with the unions representing the workforce to urge them to come together to negotiate and come to a settlement that is fair and that supports the workforce. In that regard, Mr Dey is correct in his estimation of our involvement. We are involved and we are seeking to bring our influence to bear.

Since I became the minister with responsibility for higher education, I have undertaken and discharged that responsibility on a regular basis, engaging with all parties. Just last week, I spoke with the UCU. On 27 October, I spoke with Unite and Unison. This week, I have written to the Universities and Colleges Employers Association and copied the letter to Universities Scotland, continuing to urge them to engage with each other to ensure that the matter is resolved in a satisfactory fashion. On the Dundee situation specifically, again, I have regularly engaged with unions and management. If Ms Villalba wants to contact me about another chance to engage with workforce representatives, I will be happy to do so.

Let me conclude, Presiding Officer, as you probably want me to do now. I take our responsibilities to all workers in Scotland seriously, including those who work in our academic institutions. We are serious about advancing a fair work agenda and seeing the fair work framework put into place. Through the Scottish Funding Council and our efforts, we will strain every sinew and pull every lever in our hands to make sure that we further that agenda. However, fundamentally, this situation requires further engagement and dialogue between management and the workforce to be successfully resolved. I assure members that I will continue to play my part in engaging with both parties to try to bring it to a successful resolution.

13:34 Meeting suspended.

Portfolio Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The next item of business is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is education and skills. If a member wishes to request a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button or enter the letters “RTS” in the chat function during the relevant question.

Question 1 is from Mark Griffin, who is joining us remotely.

National Qualifications (Appeals)

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the processing of appeals for the 2022 national qualifications exams. (S6O-01556)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Outcomes for priority appeals, where outcomes were needed for progression to further education, higher education, employment or training this year, were issued to centres by the Scottish Qualifications Authority on 5 September. Outcomes for the remaining 2022 appeals process were issued on 31 October, with some appeals having been expedited to 15 October for learners who were accessing the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service early applicant process for 2023 for courses such as medicine or dentistry. The SQA published a high-level summary of the 2022 appeals outcomes on 3 November, and it will publish a more detailed report in December.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

With one third of appeals in 2022 having been successful, the process has helped to ensure fairness and to mitigate the on-going effects of the global pandemic. With the pandemic still affecting young people’s education, can the cabinet secretary say whether she agrees that the SQA should commit to an appeals process for 2023, based on valid and reliable alternative evidence of demonstrated attainment?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The SQA still has a number of decisions to make, particularly about the appeals process. It is currently undertaking consultation, research and evidence work to explore the implications of the appeals process last year and how appeals have worked in previous years. The SQA’s work in that area is on-going. The SQA will keep in close contact with the national qualifications 2023 group, which includes a number of stakeholders such as learners, to see what the group’s views are before it makes any decisions for 2023.

English as an Additional Language (Support)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides to learners of English as an additional language. (S6O-01557)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The responsibility for the provision of support for children and young people who have English as an additional language rests with education authorities. Under the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2009, education authorities are legally required to identify, provide for and review the additional support needs of their pupils. That includes pupils who have English as an additional language. The Scottish Government has provided statutory guidance to education authorities and schools to support them in fulfilling their duties. English as an additional language has been specifically identified as a potential additional support need within the code of practice.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

In the past decade in Edinburgh, the number of children in schools who are new to English has increased from 595 to more than 760, and children who require early acquisition of English as an additional language has increased from 800 to more than 1,800. However, we have not seen an increase in English as an additional language teachers in our schools. What assurance can the cabinet secretary provide that councils such as Edinburgh will be given the funding that is needed for English as an additional language teachers so that we can make the most of our multilingual classrooms?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I appreciate where Miles Briggs is coming from with his question about ensuring that we are providing support for pupils for whom English is an additional language. As I said in my original answer, many of the responsibilities to identify need and ensure that the correct support is available lie with local authorities. The Scottish Government and, indeed, Education Scotland work very closely with our local authorities to ensure that anything that can be done at the national level to assist with that is done.

There are a number of ways in which funding is given to local authorities, through general expenditure or for particular education aspects of policy. Many of those go through the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, and there is an agreement with it about how that money is distributed. However, I will certainly ensure that, in future years, we bear in mind the importance of the issue, as we have done in the past.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The question is particularly important given that today is international students day, when we reflect on the contribution that our international community makes in Scotland and on the position more broadly as our students go around the world. To be frank, the cabinet secretary’s answer is not good enough. The number of teachers of English as an additional language in Scotland has decreased by 82 per cent since 2008. It is clear that the system that she outlined is not working and that the Government needs to take an active role in addressing the problem. What more can she commit to do in order to put in place a Government programme to sort out the situation?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Government continues to invest in teachers and in the teaching estate. Teacher numbers are at their highest since 2008, and the most recent figures available show that more than 16,000 pupil support assistants are providing invaluable support to pupils, including those with English as an additional language.

Further and Higher Education Institutions (Fair Work First)

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how further and higher education institutions that receive public funding via the Scottish Funding Council are expected to implement fair work first principles. (S6O-01558)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The Scottish Government strongly believes that all employers should practise fair work. The Scottish Funding Council asks institutions that receive public funding to comply with fair work first criteria through a number of mechanisms, and the criteria were included in the institutional funding letters that were issued in May 2022 and in the conditions of grant for non-core programme funds. In addition, the SFC outcome agreement guidance for the academic year 2022-23 asks institutions to demonstrate how they are meeting fair work first criteria.

SFC accounts directions require colleges and universities to report on fair work practices that have been developed in agreement with their workforce and on the progress that colleges and universities have made on implementation. The SFC is due to receive the 2021-22 accounts from institutions at the end of this calendar year.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

The minister will be aware that effective voice is one of the five dimensions of fair work, as defined by the Fair Work Convention, which says that the gold standard of effective voice is employers having clear recognition of and respect for strong trade unions.

Yesterday marked the end of 12 weeks of strike action, and today is day 613 since the pensions dispute between Unite the union and the University of Dundee began. Workers are going back to work without any resolution. University management has comprehensively failed in its obligations—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ms Chapman, can we have a question please? Thank you.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

—under the fair work effective voice criterion. Management has refused to engage with the unions.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ms Chapman, I really do need a question. Please get to the question.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Does the minister believe that it is a fair work practice to in effect derecognise campus unions? What can he do through the SFC outcome agreement discussions with the University of Dundee to ensure that workers’ voices are heard and that workers are treated with dignity and respect—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ms Chapman, I think that we have got the gist. Thank you very much.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

—in work and in retirement?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ms Chapman, thank you.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

As a former fair work minister, I take such issues seriously. I agree that trade union recognition and the organisation of workers through trade unions are an important mechanism for effective voice.

Throughout this dispute, I have urged both sides to continue constructive and meaningful dialogue. I have engaged regularly with management and trade unions, and that is on-going. Most recently, I spoke on 3 November with Iain Gillespie, the university’s principal, to encourage further dialogue between the university and the trade unions. That followed previous engagement with him and the trade unions more widely.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Colleges need £25 million for life-cycle maintenance for 2023-24, and a further £250 million is needed to make all Scotland’s college buildings wind and watertight. Does the minister agree that a warm and dry environment that is suitable for learning is the bare minimum that staff and students should expect? Will he make room in the budget to ensure that bare minimum of working conditions for college staff and students?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I am aware of challenges that we face in our college estate. We have asked the SFC to take forward a programme to set out the priorities for investment. I await that, and we will respond once after I have received it. I recognise the challenges, and we will continue to invest. The significant uplift in the capital grant this year demonstrates our commitment to investing in the college estate. I recognise that more requires to be done, and we will continue to engage with the sector on that basis.

Probationary Primary Teachers (Full-time Employment)

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of 2021 graduate probationary primary teachers have secured full-time employment in Scottish state schools after completing their probation. (S6O-01559)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

For primary teachers in the 2020-21 cohort of teacher induction scheme probationers, 70 per cent had secured full-time employment in a publicly funded school in Scotland by the time of the September 2021 census.

Statistics on the employment of the 2021-22 cohort of teacher induction scheme probationers will be published on 13 December.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

Primary teachers who carry out their probation in Dumfries and Galloway have one of the lowest rates of permanent employment. Only three teachers—just 6 per cent—of the 2020-21 cohort secured a permanent teaching position. One of the many teachers who is stuck on the supply list wrote to me and said:

“Myself like many others have worked hard to get to where we are. Teachers are feeling very unvalued at the moment and so many are currently looking at leaving the profession. I feel like my life is on hold and I cannot plan for the future. Do you think this is fair?”

Cabinet secretary, there is a problem across Scotland, especially in rural areas. What additional steps will the Government take to support local authorities, particularly in rural areas, to fill teaching vacancies and enable those newly qualified teachers to pursue the career that they want? My constituent is right to say that it is not fair.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The recruitment and retention of teachers is a matter for the local authority as the employer. However, at a national level, we clearly have a role in supporting our local authorities. That is exactly why I took the step of ensuring that we provided additional permanent funding of £145.5 million per year to support the recruitment of extra teachers. In the past, local authorities told me that one of the reasons that they could not allow permanent contracts was that some of our funding was temporary. I have changed that; the funding is now permanent, so local authorities should be allowing contracts on a permanent basis.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Three members are seeking to ask a supplementary question. I will take all three questions, but I hope that there will not be endless sub-clauses before we get to a question.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

To give the cabinet secretary credit, she did baseline that funding, which has helped to mitigate some of the problems. However, there continues to be a mismatch between the number of teachers who are available and the number of posts that are available. What changes is she making to workforce planning? What discussions has she had with the universities? What further steps will she take to make sure that those people find jobs?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I continue to be in close contact with unions and teachers directly, whom I have heard from, once again, quite recently, about some of the challenges that they face with regard to permanent contracts. We are looking at the numbers that are required for initial teacher education. At this point, those deliberations are still on-going, but that feeds into our wider workforce plans, through which we are looking at the number of teachers who are in the system at the moment and at the requirement for additional teachers in different places. That work obviously includes people in our university sector who provide the initial teacher education. Once the work is completed, those figures will be published in due course.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The cabinet secretary’s response is really not good enough. None of her responses to the question have been good enough, because we know that thousands of newly qualified teachers have left the profession or are on temporary contracts. The figures that have been reported by

The Times

should be a source of shame for the cabinet secretary. We have a situation whereby teachers have reached the end of their tether, so they have quit the profession, or they have been left in limbo for too long on temporary contracts. Those issues have been raised for years in this chamber and it simply is not good enough for the cabinet secretary to sit on her—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Could we have a question, please, Mr Kerr?

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I promise that I will get to the question.

It simply is not good enough for the cabinet secretary to sit on her hands. What will she do now to fix it?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Clearly, as I have already stated in my previous answers, we have done a lot, particularly this year. The change that we have made amounts to £145.5 million. Again, I stress to all members that they are perfectly entitled to challenge the Scottish Government on that, but none of the questions today have recognised the role of councils in looking at the permanency of the issue and the fact that they have responsibility for recruitment and retention. I take my responsibilities very seriously, and that is why I took the decision that I did not long after getting into post. However, councils also have a responsibility around recruitment and retention, and I feel that the members do not recognise that. Certainly, Mr Kerr did not.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I welcome the support that the Scottish Government is providing for the continued employment of teachers. What is the latest pupil teacher ratio? How does it compare with the ratio in the rest of the UK?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The ratio of pupils to teachers is at its lowest since 2009, with more teachers than at any time since 2008. We have the most teachers per pupil of any UK nation. The most recent comparable statistics are for 2021, and they show a pupil teacher ratio of 13.3 for Scotland, 18 for England, 19.2 for Wales and 18 for Northern Ireland.

Disabled People Leaving School (Positive Destinations)

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to improve positive destinations for disabled people leaving school. (S6O-01560)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Since November 2020, we have invested funding of up to £175 million through the young persons guarantee to create additional opportunities, with a focus on those furthest from a positive destination. That includes up to £90 million for local authorities through local employability partnerships, which are focused on early intervention and prevention by providing supported employment opportunities, training and employer recruitment initiatives.

The Scottish Government is also committed to introducing Scotland’s first national transitions to adulthood strategy in this parliamentary term, to ensure that there is a joined-up approach to supporting our disabled young people as they make the transition to adult life.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

When it comes to positive destinations for young disabled people, the picture is not good. Six months after leaving school, disabled people are twice as likely not to be in education, employment or training than their non-disabled peers. At the age of 16, the aspirations of disabled and non-disabled young people are the same; by 26, disabled people are three times more likely to feel hopeless, no matter what they do. We are failing them at a time when we should be helping them to fulfil their dreams.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that, to improve positive destinations for disabled people leaving school, a national transition strategy with a plan for all young disabled people should be put on a statutory footing, thereby giving everyone a fighting chance at a future?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I recognise the work that has been undertaken by Pam Duncan-Glancy on the bill on this issue,

and I recognise that it is an on-going process. We absolutely support the bill’s intention to improve the transition for disabled children and young people. We are at a point where we need to collectively consider where matters stand, given the consultation and work that are on-going. However, I genuinely look forward to working collaboratively with Pam Duncan-Glancy on the issue, as do my colleagues Clare Haughey and Christina McKelvie, who are working on the bill and the wider issues around transitions.

Karen Adam (Scottish National Party, Banffshire and Buchan Coast)

I welcome the update from the Scottish Government on what it is doing to improve positive destinations for disabled people leaving school. How many people are accessing modern apprenticeships and how does the number compare with pre-pandemic numbers?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Skills Development Scotland has operational responsibility for our modern apprenticeship programme, and it publishes quarterly official modern apprenticeship statistics, including the number of starts, with a full-year report being available at the end of each financial year.

The most recent statistics were published on 8 November. There were 12,593 modern apprenticeship starts by the end of quarter 2—which shows considerable progress towards getting back to pre-pandemic levels—and 1,822 modern apprenticeship starts in the second quarter have a known disability or have self-identified with an impairment, a health condition or a learning difficulty. That number is up from 1,334 at the same point last year, which is an increase of 36.6 per cent.

Safety at School (Teachers and Pupils)

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to keep teachers and pupils safe while at school. (S6O-01561)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The safety of our children, young people and staff in school is of paramount importance.

The Scottish Government and partners across education advocate for schools and local authorities to work with pupils in identifying the underlying reasons for inappropriate behaviour.

We all want pupils to behave in a respectful manner towards their peers and staff, and we have produced guidance for local authorities and schools to prevent exclusions and manage behaviour. However, it is for schools to decide what action should be taken, depending on the individual circumstances of each case.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

In Renfrewshire, over a single year, 36 teachers were assaulted by pupils, with 28 of those attacks being in primary schools. Violence has reached such extreme levels in one Glasgow secondary school that teachers have voted for strike action because they do not feel safe. There remains a real risk that proposed Scottish National Party budget cuts to justice will lead to the loss of police officers in school. Will the cabinet secretary explain how cutting campus cops will help teachers to stay safe?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

For the avoidance of doubt, and particularly for the benefit of Mr Rennie, we do not have campus cops in our schools. Mr Rennie has left the chamber, but he has had an interest in this area in the past.

We do not have campus cops in our schools. We have police officers who work with a school—primary or secondary—on issues that are of interest and use.

It is important, of course, to ensure that police officers support our schools wherever necessary. Where there is a requirement for a police officer to carry out that type of role in a school, they do just that very well and with great support at the moment. We will continue to support our teachers to ensure that no one is suffering verbal or physical abuse in our schools.

Schools and local authorities have an absolute responsibility to decide what actions should be taken. Those actions might include involving the police, if that is appropriate, but that is a decision for the school. That would be very different from using pupil equity funding to support joint work with a police officer.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Where does violence in schools sit with the Scottish Government in terms of the green-amber-red risk register?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I said in my previous answer that there is absolutely no excuse for violence in our schools. All forms of violence are absolutely unacceptable. There is a clear policy, at Government level and, I think, at local government level, that that type of behaviour is absolutely unacceptable. That is why we have in place the guidance that we have, and it is why we continue to have very close dialogue with the unions and local authorities to see whether anything else can be done on the issue.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

On the back of Russell Findlay’s question and the cabinet secretary’s answer, can we have an update on when we should expect the next iteration of the behaviour in Scottish schools research—BISSR—and how the findings of the first research impacts on Scottish Government policy?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I am pleased to confirm that, after a delay caused by the pandemic, we have recently awarded the contract for the next phase of behaviour in Scottish schools research to ScotCen Social Research. Officials are working with analysts and the contractor to make arrangements for the fieldwork, which will start next year. They expect the research report

by the end of 2023.

Support in Schools (Staff and Pupils)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how it is ensuring adequate support provision is available for staff and pupils in schools. (S6O-01562)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

All children and young people should receive the support that they need to reach their full potential. I recognise the critical role of all school staff in achieving that aim, and remain committed to supporting them in their work.

Local authorities are responsible for identifying and meeting the additional support needs of their pupils. We are working closely with local government partners, through the additional support for learning project board, to ensure that we continue to see progress in the delivery of the recommendations from Angela Morgan’s review. An updated action plan and progress report will be published shortly.