Scottish Parliament, 15 December 2022

335 contributions from 81 members. The official report.

Devolution Settlement

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether any changes to the current devolution settlement should only be implemented with the explicit democratic consent of the Scottish people. (S6O-01700)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish devolution settlement is founded on the principle that the people of Scotland are governed only with their consent. The devolution settlement built in a requirement that changes to this Parliament’s powers should be made only with the agreement of this Parliament, either by approval of section 30 orders or by legislative consent under the Sewel convention. Unfortunately, the current United Kingdom Government has failed to adhere to the democratic principle and has restricted the powers of this Parliament without its agreement.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, says that winning the next UK general election would deliver a mandate for his party to implement constitutional change but refuses to recognise that a pro-independence victory across Scotland would deliver a similar mandate. What does that say about Labour’s credentials as a democratic party? Does the cabinet secretary have any confidence that the Labour Party’s timid and compliant branch office in Scotland might evolve a different view that respects the democratically expressed wishes of the Scottish people?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

That double standard undermines the credibility of Labour’s recent constitutional report. It would be unacceptable for changes to devolution to be made without the agreement of the Scottish Parliament. Proceeding to implement proposals to change the devolution settlement on the basis of a manifesto pledge, while denying the right of a Scottish Government—which is elected on the same basis—to hold a referendum on independence, would further undermine Scottish democracy.

In passing, I note that, yesterday, the House of Commons debated measures that could have ensured that this Parliament would have the power to hold a referendum on Scotland’s future. The Tories voted to block Scottish democracy and the Labour Party abstained.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Over recent weeks, I have repeatedly asked questions in this Parliament on currency, Europe and border checks for an independent Scotland, but ministers have been unable to answer any of them. Is the cabinet secretary sure that he is ready for a referendum?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I would be delighted to have a referendum and delighted to have the Scottish Liberal Democrats’ support for us to hold a referendum in Scotland. Perhaps Willie Rennie could confirm how Liberal Democrat MPs voted in yesterday’s vote in the House of Commons. I suspect that they bravely abstained.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 2 was withdrawn.

National Treatment Centre Highland

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

3. To ask the Scottish Government when the national treatment centre Highland will be fully operational. (S6O-01702)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

NTC Highland is on track to open in April 2023.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I welcome the long-overdue national treatment centre in Inverness and the fact that it is nearing completion only 18 months late. Patients need that facility now more than ever, especially as research shows that there is a risk of a seven-year wait for orthopaedic treatment. Unacceptable waiting times will not begin to reduce until the national treatment centre has a full workforce in place, but 30 per cent of the staff are still to be recruited. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the national treatment centre will not only open on 3 April but be fully operational on 3 April?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I know that it is the season, but the member should not be such a Grinch when it comes to the fantastic investment that the Scottish National Party-led Government is making in Inverness and Highland. He should welcome the fact that we are on track to deliver 1,350 orthopaedic procedures in the first year of NTC Highland opening.

H

e should be grateful for the investment that the SNP is making in Highland, which is the right thing to do. Of course, we announced our NTC programme pre-pandemic, but it is now even more important, given the pressures of the pandemic.

Staffing and recruitment is on-going. Edward Mountain gave some figures for the workforce to be recruited by NHS Highland; recruitment efforts are on-going. As he would expect in relation to a project of this size and scale, the centre will open in a phased manner, and rightly so. However, it will meet the target that I set out in October of 1,350

orthopaedic procedures in the first financial year.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

It may be panto season, but I am not sure that the audience bought that answer.

One in seven Scots are currently languishing on waiting lists. It was reported earlier this year that half the Government’s NTCs would be delayed. This is therefore not only an issue in Highland. Does the cabinet secretary accept that jam tomorrow is not good enough, and will he tell us whether he expects any further slippage in the current timetable elsewhere in the country?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I gave a recent update on national treatment centres and their opening dates. I am happy to write to Paul O’Kane if he has not seen that in order to provide the latest in that regard.

The Government is taking steps to deal with those long waits. What was missing from pantomime villain Paul O’Kane’s question was the fact that the pandemic has had a huge impact. He is simply burying his head in the sand if he does not recognise the impact and effect of the biggest shock our national health service has ever faced in its 74-year existence.

We have seen some progress in reducing the longest waits right up and down the country, which is the relentless focus of my role and of the Government as a whole.

Scottish Resilience Partnership

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

4. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has recently had with the Scottish resilience partnership in preparation for the winter. (S6O-01703)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The Scottish resilience partnership is a strategic policy forum for resilience issues that takes a common approach to setting a strategic direction and priorities for resilience in Scotland. I confirm that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans attended the most recent SRP meeting on 25 October 2022 and discussed with partners their updates on the preparations that they were taking for winter, including learning from previous severe weather events and testing and exercising. The SRP chair, Jim Savege, was present at the SGoRR(M)—Scottish Government resilience room ministerial—meeting on Wednesday 2 November and provided a brief update. The SRP deputy, Deputy Chief Constable Graham was present on Thursday 8 December to represent the SRP.

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

Throughout this week, Scotland has seen a significant drop in temperatures, with associated yellow weather warnings issued. Industrial action south of the border has moved travellers on to roads, Shetland householders have been without power and, tragically, the risks around frozen ice on lakes were highlighted earlier in the week. Will the cabinet secretary outline what steps our constituents should take this winter to ensure that they stay safe during adverse weather events, and where they can find the best available information and advice?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The best location for constituents to seek advice on what they should do during periods of adverse weather is the Scottish Government’s Ready Scotland website at ready.scot. It provides information for the public on how to prepare and stay safe during periods of severe winter weather, including a warning to people not to venture on to frozen water. The advice also includes keeping up to date with the latest weather warnings, checking on vulnerable neighbours, and calling 105 free of charge in the event of a power failure for help and advice. I encourage anyone who is seeking advice to access that resource, which provides a range of different information on what action can be taken during adverse weather.

Promise Scotland

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

5. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the work of the Promise Scotland. (S6O-01704)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The Promise Scotland produced “Plan 21-24”, which sets the outcomes that must be achieved by organisations across Scotland by 2024. It is engaged in key national work on the children’s hearings system redesign and the development of a model for lifelong advocacy, and it is involved in work to understand the best models of governance and financial arrangements for care. At the local level, it is working with children’s services partnerships and national bodies through its role in delivering “Plan 21-24” and bringing together and supporting common interests and activities.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Will the minister please outline the financial and family support that is available to adopted children in Scotland?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

A range of financial and practical support is available to adopted children, young people and their families. All local authorities have a legal duty to provide support to meet the needs of adoptive families, which could include an adoption allowance in certain circumstances.

We are also taking direct action. This year, we have initiated the whole-family wellbeing programme to transform delivery of holistic family support. That includes investment of £2 million through children’s services planning partnerships, and we are supporting them in driving that work at the local level. We have also provided £350,000 to third sector organisations that support adopted children, young people and their families. That money has been used to fund Adoption UK Scotland to provide a

national helpline and to fund Birthlink to provide and maintain an adoption contact register to support contact between adopted people and their birth parents and relatives.

Barra and Vatersay Community Campus Project

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

6. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress of the Barra and Vatersay community campus project. (S6O-01705)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We are pleased that there has been extended engagement with the community and service delivery partners on a range of approaches, and the preferred cluster approach will ensure that a community hub is created.

NHS Western Isles has submitted to the Scottish Government its outline business case for the replacement of St Brendan’s hospital. The business case will be reviewed and assessed by the NHS capital investment group at its next meeting in January. Following that review, we will make a decision on next steps, based on the group’s recommendation.

Scottish Government officials and the Scottish Futures Trust remain in close contact with Comhairle nan Eilean Siar and NHS Western Isles regarding delivery of that vital project, which will serve the Barra community.

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

I welcome the progress on this much-needed facility. Is the cabinet secretary able to confirm when the next stages in the process of approving finance will take place and when more detailed architects’ drawings might be available for the community to see?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

In relation to the health elements of the campus, after the business case has been reviewed by the NHS capital investment group in the new year, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care will decide on the next steps in approval of finance.

Funding for the school elements of the campus has already been approved through phase 1 of the learning estate investment programme. Further detailed discussions are on-going as the project develops.

The design proposals were shared publicly earlier this year as part of the planning process. The feedback was very positive, which allowed the process to continue with expected wide community support. Following approval to proceed to the next stage of development in the new year, the design information will be made available to the community for comment through the planning process.

Specialist Medical Equipment (Procurement)

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that national health service boards comply with public procurement rules in relation to the purchase and operation of specialist medical equipment. (S6O-01706)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Specialist medical equipment is purchased from regulated procurement frameworks, where available, or under new procurement tenders that are initiated in accordance with the relevant legislation. Health boards employ specialist procurement professionals to ensure compliance with procurement rules. NHS standing financial instructions stipulate the required governance concerning the procurement of all products and services. The Scottish Government provides procurement guidance and support to all health boards via its procurement website, procurement policy notes and the Scottish procurement policy handbook.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

My constituent Jason Donnelly, of Medical Devices UK, has raised very serious concerns with me

about failures in procurement practice, breaches of freedom of information legislation and potentially unsafe working practices in NHS Grampian. I believe that he has also raised those concerns with his constituency MSP, John Swinney.

Mr Swinney wrote to the health secretary raising the concerns on 8 March this year, but, to my knowledge, there has not been a response to that letter. I wrote to the health secretary on 13 June and again on 30 September, but I have not had a response.

Given the very serious matters that my constituent has raised, when will I receive a reply to my letters? Will the health secretary institute an urgent inquiry into the concerns that have been raised that affect patient safety?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I will, of course, look into any reasons why Mr Fraser has not received a response, and I apologise if a response has been unnecessarily delayed. The issues that have been raised by his constituent—he is correct that the Deputy First Minister has also raised them with me—involve pretty serious allegations relating to quite a long and complex procurement issue. Therefore, I can confirm to Murdo Fraser that I have asked NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to carry out an external review in relation to the allegations and the concerns that have been raised, and it is to report back to me by the end of January. I will keep Murdo Fraser and, indeed, the constituency MSP, John Swinney, updated on the outcome of that external review.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

Does the cabinet secretary agree and accept that the Scottish Government can learn from the potentially fraudulent mistakes of the United Kingdom Government by ruling out the use of VIP procurement lanes?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Absolutely. VIP lanes were introduced by the UK Government during the pandemic to procure personal protective equipment. They were used by Government officials, ministers, MPs, members of the House of Lords and health professionals to submit offers of PPE. That was perhaps problematic in itself, but there are further concerns that proper due diligence—to put it mildly—was not carried out on some of the VIP lane submissions. We are used to jobs for the boys when it comes to the Conservatives; perhaps it is jobs for the baronesses, too.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Freedom of information requests have shown that previous Scottish National Party health secretaries were aware of the wrongdoing by NHS Grampian that Mr Donnelly refers to. Can the cabinet secretary explain why the Government has taken so long to take action in this very serious case?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I would be careful in that regard. If Ms Baillie has concrete evidence that there was wrongdoing, I hope that she will be happy to provide that to me and, indeed, to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which will be conducting the external review. It is important that we allow NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to conduct that review, which, as I said, I have asked to be completed by the end of January next year. I can keep Ms Baillie updated on its outcome.

Abortion Clinics (Buffer Zones)

Colin Beattie (Scottish National Party, Midlothian North and Musselburgh)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what the next steps are in implementing buffer zones outside abortion clinics in Scotland, in light of the United Kingdom Supreme Court judgment on this issue handed down on 7 December 2022. (S6O-01707)

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

The Scottish Government welcomes the UK Supreme Court’s judgment. We are carefully considering the judgment in the Scottish context, and we remain committed to supporting Gillian Mackay with the development of her member’s bill to safeguard access for women in Scotland to healthcare facilities that provide abortion services, without fear, harassment or intimidation.

Colin Beattie (Scottish National Party, Midlothian North and Musselburgh)

It is vital that people are able to access healthcare services without being harassed, and I hope that our commitment to work cross party on the issue will continue. Now that the UK Supreme Court has clarified the legal situation on buffer zones, when does the Scottish Government expect to convene the next abortion summit?

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

We remain committed to working with other parties across the chamber to ensure that women can access fundamental health services without feeling harassed or intimidated, as is their right. Officials are exploring potential dates for the summit on abortion care, which is currently expected to take place in February 2023.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes general question time. There will be a short pause before we move to First Minister’s question time.

I confirm that, under the next item of business, members who wish to ask constituency or general supplementaries should press their buttons during question 2, and that members who wish to ask supplementaries on questions 3 to 6 should press their buttons during the relevant question.

Closing the Attainment Gap

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. Will the First Minister remind us of the promise that she made seven years ago, about the attainment gap in Scotland’s schools?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The promise was to close the attainment gap over the then forthcoming session of the Parliament. I made that commitment, which was referenced as being “within a decade”. I remain committed to doing that, and during the course of this line of questioning I will be happy to talk about the progress that we are making.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The promise was to close the attainment gap—not to keep it where it was, narrow it a little or make some modest progress. No—Nicola Sturgeon wanted

“to close the attainment gap completely”.

However, figures that have been published this week confirm that in primary schools the attainment gap is even wider than it was three years ago. That is the case for reading, writing, literacy and numeracy. The attainment gap is not closing. Since the First Minister made that pledge, there has been no progress. Has not she failed to keep her promise to young people across Scotland?

The First Minister

No. Just to be precise—I always like to be precise—I note that the specific commitment that was made was to “substantially eliminate” the attainment gap. For the avoidance of doubt—[

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, members.

The First Minister

—that was the wording in our manifesto, and I stand by it completely.

Pre-pandemic, the poverty-related attainment gap was closing. The negative impact of the pandemic cannot be ignored—in Scotland or elsewhere. In fact, the Department for Education south of the border said of the attainment gap that

“disruption to learning during the ... pandemic has had a greater impact on disadvantaged pupils”,

so the situation is not unique to Scotland.

However, what we actually see in the statistics that have been published this week is that recovery is now under way and we are starting to see improvements again. The percentage of pupils achieving the expected levels in 2021-22, which is the period that the latest statistics cover, is higher than that for the previous year for all primary school ages. In fact, we see the largest single-year increase in primary school literacy and numeracy since data collection began. There are also signs that the attainment gap is again narrowing, with the biggest single-year decrease in the gap in primary school literacy levels—again, since records began.

That is the progress that we are making. Was it interrupted by Covid? Of course it was—and that was the case in countries across the world. However, we continue to make progress and, of course, we remain committed to driving it further.

We also see progress in exam results, which show the gap between attainment levels in the least deprived and most deprived areas narrowing from the level in 2019, which was the pre-pandemic year, of course. In the past few days, we have also had the university applications end-of-cycle data, which shows that a record number of 18-year-old Scots have secured university places this year. The number of 18-year-olds from the most deprived areas securing places has also increased—by 31 per cent—since 2019. Again, that is a record high, which demonstrates the progress that we are making on closing the attainment gap and widening access.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It is telling that when I ask a short question the First Minister tells the truth. She told us that she promised to close the attainment gap. However, when she has time to ruffle through her big folder, she does not accept that and says that the promise has been kept. It has not; she has failed people across Scotland. Yet again, what we get from the First Minister is the Covid shield coming out to protect her.

Let us look at the pre-pandemic position. Even in the few areas where there was limited progress before the pandemic, the improvement was less than 1 per cent per year. It would have taken more than four decades to close the gap at primary school level, had we carried on at that rate. At secondary school level, the curriculum for excellence attainment gap was not closing at all.

The First Minister is still trying to say that this year’s results are positive. However, the fact is that the gap has only just returned to 2016 levels, which was the point at which the First Minister made her pledge. Basically, she wants us to believe that we are winning the race when, in fact, we have only just got back to the starting line.

This year’s figures show that at least one in five pupils is still not meeting the expected level for each of the essential core subjects. That is what the First Minister defines as progress: one in five children not reaching the standard that we expect. What makes that even more ridiculous is that, in 2015, the First Minister said:

“If you are not, as First Minister, prepared to put your neck on the line on the education of our young people then what are you prepared to.”

Does the First Minister stand by those words?

The First Minister

Absolutely—I stand by them 100 per cent. Few things—if anything is—are more important than the opportunities that we give our children and young people. Of course, to be accurate, when we talk about the attainment gap, we should say the “poverty-related attainment gap”, because poverty drives it. One of the measures of our commitment to tackling that is that we are putting money into the pockets of the poorest families in the country, which we are doing at the same time as Douglas Ross’s party takes money out of their pockets.

I will go back to the specifics. First, I do, and did, accept the premise of Douglas Ross’s first question. I then went on to give the precise language that we used, so that there was no dubiety.

Secondly, if Douglas Ross likes accuracy, he should perhaps start to practice it. I did not say that the target for 2026 had been met. I said—and backed it up with lots of evidence—that progress is being made.

Thirdly, I did not use Covid as a shield; rather, I cited evidence of the impact of Covid, in the same way that the Department for Education south of the border did, when it said:

“disruption to learning during the ... pandemic has had a greater impact on disadvantaged pupils.”

If Douglas Ross does not want to take the word of a Government that is run by his own party, perhaps he will take that of the chief executive officer of the Education Endowment Foundation, who said:

“The findings add to a heavy body of evidence telling us that socio-economic inequality in education—already entrenched before the pandemic—has grown.”

Again, I say that we see progress in narrowing of the attainment gap: we see it in the figures that were published this week, in exam results and in access to university. It is not yet “Job done”, which is why I stand by everything that I said. It is one of the most important things that the Government is doing, which is why we will continue to take the action that we are taking to achieve it.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

“Progress”, First Minister. Let us look at the percentage of secondary 3 pupils who are achieving third level or better in literacy. The attainment gap for that in 2016-17 was 13.6 per cent; in 2021-22, it is 16.3 per cent. That is not progress. Here is a First Minister who told everyone to judge her on her record on education. It was to be her number 1 priority and the big test of her time in office, but she has failed on the attainment gap, on class sizes, on standards, on violence in schools and on teacher numbers.

Nicola Sturgeon wanted us to judge her on education; she said that her neck was on the line. If that is the case—if the First Minister wants to be judged on education, if her job is on the line and if, as she said, there are fewer things that are more important than education—why does she not ditch the de facto referendum and make the next election all about her record on Scotland’s schools?

The First Minister

The judge of how long I stay in this job is not Douglas Ross; it is the people of Scotland. On all evidence, the people of Scotland think, when it comes to the choice between me and any of the other party leaders in this chamber, that they want me to be First Minister. I take that responsibility very seriously and I will continue to do the job to the very best of my ability.

We will continue to take the actions that we have been taking. Douglas Ross talks about teacher numbers, but there are more teachers per head of pupil population in Scotland than there are anywhere else in the United Kingdom, including where the Conservatives are in power. Spending on education in Scotland is higher than it is where the Conservatives are in power.

As I have already demonstrated, although there is considerable work to do, we are making progress in narrowing the attainment gap. We see that in figures this week, in exam results and in the fact that a record number of 18-year-olds from deprived areas are now going to university, which is something that I am proud of, and which everybody across Scotland should be proud of, too.

Cancer Treatment Waiting Standards

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. Everybody in our country has been touched by cancer, either directly or through a family member or friend. Cancer remains Scotland’s biggest killer. We have treatment waiting standards for a reason—we know that the faster someone is diagnosed and the faster they start treatment, the more likely they are to survive.

The Government has not met the 62-day standard for 10 years, and it is now not even meeting the 31-day standard. The situation is the worst that it has ever been. When will our cancer treatment standards be met?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

On the 31-day standard, performance this quarter has dipped very marginally below 95 per cent. Of course, we will work with health boards to get that back up. The 62-day standard for urgent referral for suspicion of cancer to first treatment is not being met, but we are taking a range of actions to secure improvement there.

It is important to note that the targets are percentage targets. We set those targets, and I am not suggesting for a minute that they are not important, but when we look at the number of people treated on both those pathways, we can see a significant increase—more patients were treated on the 62-day and 31-day pathways in the latest quarter compared with the previous quarter, and in the latest quarter compared with the same time last year, and with the last full quarter before the Covid pandemic. In fact, we are now treating 35 per cent more people on the 62-day pathway than we were 10 years ago, and just under 16 per cent more on the 31-day pathway than we were 10 years ago.

That is evidence of the fact that more patients are going through and being treated on those pathways. That is important, because the premise of Anas Sarwar’s question is absolutely correct: people need to receive urgent treatment for cancer. If we look at the 31-day performance target, we can see that the median wait for treatment there is four days. On the 62-day standard, the median wait for treatment is 48 days, and we will continue to take action to improve that even further.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister is right—the numbers are important, because the situation is stark. Figures that have come out this week show that, in the past three months alone, more than 1,000 people did not start their treatment on time. That has devastating consequences. Cancer was already Scotland’s biggest killer but, in the past year, there have been 198 more cancer deaths above the five-year average. That is 198 more families who have lost a loved one.

The national health service crisis is costing lives. We were told to expect a catch-up plan but, instead, things continue to get worse. We have patients who are worried about their diagnosis, families who are anxious for treatment to start and people who have lost a loved one. They are watching, so I ask again: when will our cancer treatment standards be met?

The First Minister

I will come on to the range of actions that we are taking to meet the percentage targets, which are important, but the numbers that I am talking about here are important for the very reasons that Anas Sarwar has mentioned. The numbers signify individual patients with cancer.

The figure that I gave a moment ago was a percentage figure. On the 62-day pathway, 10 years ago, in the quarter that we are talking about just now, 3,110 people were seen; in the most recent quarter, 4,161 people were seen. On the other pathway, 10 years ago, the figure was 5,500 people; today, it is almost 6,500. What does that say? It says that our cancer services are seeing more patients, and they are seeing more patients on those urgent pathways. That is important, and it is important for individuals.

However, there is more work to do here. For example, over the next few years, we will invest £40 million to support cancer services and, specifically, to improve waiting times. That investment is focused particularly on urology and colorectal and breast cancer, because those are the pathways that are under the greatest challenge. We are investing in the endoscopy and urology diagnostic plan. We have six one-stop urology diagnostic hubs. We are committed to earlier diagnosis through the rapid cancer diagnostic services that are coming on stream.

All of that work is important to further improve performance, but it is really important to recognise the volume of work that our cancer services are doing each and every day.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister cannot escape from the fact that treatment standards not being met means people not being diagnosed in time, treatment not starting in time and people losing their lives. The standard response from the First Minister will not comfort people who cannot get treatment or are losing a loved one. There has not been a single day during Nicola Sturgeon’s time as First Minister on which she has met the 62-day cancer treatment standard—not a single day.

The First Minister might not want to listen to me, but this is what Macmillan Cancer Support said this week:

“Cancer waiting times have been getting worse for years and today’s figures show the worrying trend continues right across the country, even before the added pressure of winter is factored in.”

Macmillan is again raising the alarm about cancer care in Scotland. If a doctor suspects that someone has cancer, the patient rightly expects to be diagnosed and treated in time. This is costing lives. After 15 years in Government and 10 years as First Minister, during which the 62-day standard has never been met, it is important that we get a straight answer. So, I ask again: when will both cancer treatment standards be met? Will it be in one year, five years, 10 years or never?

The First Minister

We will continue to work each and every day to meet not only those targets but all targets across our health service. That is happening right now and in the most challenging of circumstances, as I think everyone knows. The fact of the matter is that, because of the investments that are being made and the actions that are being taken, the capacity of cancer services is increasing. That is demonstrated by the increase in the number of patients being treated on those pathways, which is important.

Of course we need to see even more patients being treated, but I repeat the point that I made earlier: for the 31-day standard, the median waiting time is not 31 days but four days from the decision being made to treat a cancer patient to the treatment actually starting. For the 62-day standard, which is from urgent referral to treatment, the median waiting time is 48 days.

We will continue taking action to improve that further.

I do listen—I listen very carefully to what is said in the chamber. I also listen very carefully to and work closely with organisations such as Macmillan Cancer Support, which does such a good job across cancer services.

It is because we take all of that so seriously that we have put, and will continue to put, so much effort into ensuring that we reward those working in our national health service as well as we possibly can. Today, this is the only part of the United Kingdom in which there are no strikes in our national health service. The commitment that we give to our national health service, which will be demonstrated in the budget this afternoon, is to continue to build capacity so that we continue to improve treatment for patients with cancer and for patients who present to the NHS for any reason.

The Presiding Officer

I will take constituency and general supplementary questions after question 6. Members who have pressed their request-to-speak buttons do not need to do so again.

Strep A (Antibiotics)

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

3. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government plans to address reported shortages of antibiotics, in light of the growing number of Strep A cases. (S6F-01647)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Medicines supply is a reserved matter, but the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has discussed the issue with the United Kingdom Government to seek assurances about supply of antibiotics to treat group A Strep, in response to the sharp increase in demand.

We have been advised that manufacturers in the UK currently have adequate supplies of antibiotics and that wholesalers and manufacturers are working at speed to continually replenish stock.

Scottish Government officials have issued a medicine supply alert notice providing advice to healthcare professionals on prescribing options, including alternative antibiotics if the first-line option is unavailable. In addition to that, work is under way to further strengthen the resilience of the supply chain, including by releasing antibiotics from medicines stockpiles, increasing manufacture of antibiotic liquid preparation and, where necessary, importing additional supplies.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Just today, the health secretary claimed that there are no shortages of antibiotics here. At the same time, NHS Scotland said that a medicine supply alert was imminent. Doctors in my constituency in the Borders have described the situation as “horrendous”. Hospital staff and pharmacists have echoed those concerns and chemists cannot get hold even of liquid penicillin to treat kids who have sore throats.

Does the First Minister accept that the health secretary should be more aware of the seriousness of the situation with antibiotics supply in Scotland, instead of burying his head in the sand?

The First Minister

This is a really serious issue that involves the health of children. I believe that we all take that seriously, and I think that we should treat the issue in that context.

Nobody is burying their head in the sand over this. Notwithstanding the fact that, as I said earlier, medicines supply is actually a reserved matter—it is not within the responsibilities of this Parliament or this Government—we take our responsibilities seriously. This week, the Cabinet had a very lengthy discussion on Strep A in general, and on antibiotics supply, in particular. The chief pharmaceutical officer took part in that discussion.

We are, of course, aware of some localised supply problems with penicillin and amoxicillin liquid preparations due to the increase in demand across the whole UK, but such demand-led shortages are not uncommon. The national health service has robust systems in place to deal with them, and the assessment right now is that there is sufficient supply in the UK to meet needs.

That said, where there are shortages of liquid penicillin, for example, notices are put out about alternatives that can be used—the solid form of the same antibiotics or, sometimes, alternative antibiotics. With alternative antibiotics, we have the option of drawing down from medicines stockpiles.

Such issues are of the utmost seriousness and I ask all members to treat them in that way. Everybody takes the matter very seriously and we are all working hard and working together to make sure that there is a good response now, in the face of rising demand.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Many parents from my constituency were in touch last week about the lack of antibiotics for their children who were suspected of having Strep A. One mother with a two-year-old child had to contact more than 20 pharmacies before their prescription was filled.

At the start of last week, Humza Yousaf told the Parliament that there was no problem with supply, but unfortunately that is not the reality. He was clearly confused, because the First Minister’s Government has just issued an antibiotics shortage alert. Can the First Minister tell us whether Humza Yousaf was wrong? Will she outline what steps she will take to address the supply chain issues and reassure parents?

The First Minister

Jackie Baillie stood up then and acted as if she was giving information that was somehow new. I said in my original answer that the Scottish Government had issued a medicine supply alert notice, and we do that for a particular reason. I have already covered that, but I will come back to it.

Humza Yousaf has been, and continues to be, right in what he says. There is no overall shortage of antibiotics, but when there is a surge in demand—not just in the case of Strep A, but in other situations—there will often be localised shortages. However, there are systems in place in the NHS to deal with that. When the particular first-line antibiotic for any condition might be in shortage, there are alternatives. Part of the purpose of the supply notice is to advise healthcare practitioners of the alternatives that can be used if liquid penicillin, for example, which is the first-line antibiotic in this case, is not available. That is the proper way to do things. Everybody is treating the matter with the utmost seriousness.

I come back to the factual point that medicines supply is not within the responsibilities of this Government: unfortunately, it is a reserved matter. We continue to work with the UK Government, but we also to do everything that we can to ensure adequate supply, and that is what we will continue to do.

Self-Isolation Support Grant

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

4. To ask the First Minister what impact the self-isolation support grant has had on low-income workers who have contracted Covid-19. (S6F-01649)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Grants of £73 million have been made to low-income workers and their families to help them to isolate from Covid-19. That support has helped over 150,000 low-income households all over Scotland since the scheme began in October 2020.

When the UK Government removed the £20 universal credit top-up, we continued offering the grant to all low-income households that would have been eligible previously. The grant was, of course, a temporary measure while self-isolation was an essential tool to control Covid. The scheme will close from 5 January next year. However, we will be able to reinstate it quickly if circumstances require it.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I thank the First Minister for that reply. The payment was crucial for many people during the pandemic and was the longest-running scheme of its kind in the UK.

Does the First Minister agree that the payment, in addition to the Scottish child payment, shows that this Parliament has the best interests of the people of Scotland, along with tackling poverty, at the heart of decision making? Does she agree that, with the full powers of independence, we could do much more without the need to mitigate decisions that are made at Westminster that are punishing the poorest people in society?

The First Minister

It is always really striking just how uncomfortable the Scottish Conservatives get when poverty is mentioned in the chamber. [

Interruption.

] I am not sure that it is always visible to the people who are watching at home, but the catcalling, heckling and shuffling in seats always start from the Conservatives, because they know deep down inside—or not even so deep down inside—that their party is pushing more and more people into poverty every week.

It is this Government’s responsibility to do everything that we can to lift people out of poverty. The Scottish child payment is the foremost example of that. During times of extremity at the height of the Covid pandemic, the self-isolation payment was a very important tool, and 150,000 low-income households all over the country were helped through the pandemic. It was an important measure. I hope that it will not be necessary again, but we stand ready to reintroduce it, should circumstances dictate that it is necessary.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the Scottish Government extend the eligibility for its new employment injury assistance to key workers who are suffering from long Covid that was caught at work and who are now unable to return?

The First Minister

I am certainly happy to look into that. In general terms, we will do everything we can to help those who continue to be impacted by Covid. I am happy to look into the detail of the particular question and to revert to Mark Griffin as soon as possible.

Women’s Health Champion

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister, further to her commitment in June that a women’s health champion for Scotland would be appointed in the summer, whether such an appointment will be made before Christmas. (S6F-01648)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

A number of high-quality candidates have been interviewed for that important role, and the appointments process is now in its final stages. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care will provide an update to the Parliament early in the new year.

Of course, addressing women’s health inequalities is much bigger than just one person, but there is no doubt that the appointment of a women’s health champion is an important part of our women’s health plan. That is why we have invested the time that is necessary to consider who is the very best candidate for the role. The appointment has taken a bit longer than we had envisaged but, as I said, that process is now in its final stages.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

That answer is disappointing, but I cannot say that I am surprised by the news that the appointment will not be made before Christmas. In June, the First Minister promised that the appointment would be made during the summer; in September, the Minister for Public Health, Women’s Health and Sport told me that the announcement would be made very soon; and, in October, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care advised that the appointment was imminent.

Given that health inequalities disproportionately impact on women from deprived areas, that women’s health matters are not being considered and treated with respect in the workplace, and that diagnosis rates for cancers that specifically impact on women remain stubbornly high, we need a women’s health champion—we have needed a women’s health champion—timeously. The First Minister knows that the delay is unacceptable. Will she commit to personally ensuring that the appointment is one of her first actions in 2023?

The First Minister

I have already set out that the health secretary will update the Parliament very early in the new year. It would be unacceptable to appoint somebody whom we did not think was the best person for the role, whatever their skills and attributes. It is essential that we get the right person with the right skills and the right expertise, and I am confident that we will do that. As I said, that process is in its final stages.

I agree very much with Carol Mochan that the appointment of a women’s health champion is important, but delivery of the women’s health plan does not rest solely on that; we continue to take forward the strands of the plan. However, there is no doubt that our ability to do that will be augmented by the appointment early in the new year.

Public Transport

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

6. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is supporting public transport to be better used and more affordable. (S6F-01653)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We are taking decisive action to widen access to and maintain the affordability of public transport, particularly during the current cost of living crisis. Up to 2.3 million people in Scotland are now able to access free bus travel through the schemes for older and disabled people and for those aged under 22.

Since we launched the under-22s scheme in January, more than 35.6 million journeys have been made, which have provided access to jobs, education and leisure activities and enabled younger people to develop sustainable travel habits early in life.

We have frozen rail fares until at least March next year and, likewise, we have intervened to hold fares in the northern isles ferry network at current levels until the end of March next year.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

The First Minister is right to highlight the success of free bus travel for under-22s in particular—an initiative that the Scottish Greens first secured when we were in opposition and which we have been proud to see delivered since we joined the Government.

The Bute house agreement commits the Scottish Government and the Scottish Greens to taking a number of actions that are intended to boost public transport usage and improve affordability, including introducing a community bus fund; making significant infrastructure upgrades through strategic transport projects review 2, such as the Clyde metro; and taking action on fares. Given the comments last week by the Climate Change Committee, does the First Minister agree that making bus and rail usage more reliable and affordable is essential to meeting Scotland’s climate ambitions?

The First Minister

I agree very much with that. I also agree and take the opportunity to recognise that free bus travel for under-22s is a great example of the partnership in government between the Scottish National Party and the Green Party—I know that the Conservatives and Labour love hearing about that.

It is important to incentivise public transport use, but that on its own will not be enough to drive down sector emissions. Cars account for nearly 40 per cent of transport emissions, so I agree with the Climate Change Committee that plans to discourage car use are needed to accompany current plans to encourage active travel and the use of public transport. The need for both those aspects is set out in “A route map to achieve a 20 per cent reduction in car kilometres by 2030”.

As well as the action that I have outlined, the on-going fair fares review will ensure a sustainable and integrated approach to public transport fares in the future. All those actions are important and necessary, and the SNP-Green Government will continue to take them.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

When are we going to see the national smart travel card that the SNP promised us more than six years ago?

The First Minister

As I have demonstrated, the actions that the Government is taking on public transport stand comparison with those of any Government across these islands. Unlike Governments elsewhere, we will continue to progress all those actions.

The Presiding Officer

We move to general and constituency supplementaries.

Communication Resilience

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

On Monday, the appalling weather in Shetland caused major power line faults and cut off nearly 4,000 properties. I thank all those who are involved in trying to resolve this major incident, which has had an impact on residents, who have shown great community strength and resilience, although some people face a fourth day without power.

Regular information updates from Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks and Shetland Islands Council have been well reported in local media, but what can the Scottish Government do to address communication issues when the power is down, digital land-lines have run out of back-up power and the mobile signal is patchy? How can households access key information with dead batteries and no internet? Will the Scottish Government provide more resource for communication resilience to deal with episodes such as this and storm Arwen last year, given that adverse weather events are likely to occur more frequently because of the climate crisis?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Beatrice Wishart’s question is pertinent and timely. Parts of Shetland continue to experience an extended loss of power. SSEN is making every effort to restore supplies, but many properties have been off power for days. Local agencies have declared a major incident, and a significant response is being and has been mobilised to support the affected communities.

The numbers as of this morning—they might have moved on since then—were that 2,400 customers across Shetland remained offline and 2,899 customers’ power had been restored since the power cut took place. Resources continue to be deployed to Shetland, and SSEN has a 60-strong team out in the field to work on repairing damage. Another 62 field staff were to arrive by ferry this morning, including mutual aid support workers from Scottish Power Energy Networks and Northern Powergrid, and approximately 20 further field staff will arrive by ferry tomorrow morning, which will take the total number of staff who are working to restore power in Shetland to approximately 140.

A Scottish Government resilience operation was formally activated on Tuesday to provide whatever support and co-ordination we can, and SGoRR—Scottish Government resilience room—will have a further meeting this afternoon. I will take the point about communication resilience to those people in that meeting and ask for consideration of what more the Scottish Government can do to support the communication efforts, because that is important—although I know that everybody is working hard to communicate information as best they can.

A final piece of information is that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans who, of course, has ministerial responsibility for resilience, is currently en route to Shetland to see for himself the operation that is under way.

Action on Poverty

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

New research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation shows that 7.2 million people are going without basics and 4.7 million are struggling to pay their bills. At the same time, the Child Poverty Action Group has published a report that shows that the cost of bringing up a child has significantly lowered in Scotland as a result of Scottish Government interventions. Given that most of the key levers are reserved, what action does the First Minister think that the United Kingdom Government urgently needs to take to help people through the winter? [

Interruption

.]

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Again, we are getting the same response from the Conservatives at the mention of poverty. I say to the Scottish Conservatives that, no matter how uncomfortable it makes them, the Government and my party in Parliament will never stop talking about the scourge of poverty—particularly child poverty—and our determination to tackle and eradicate it.

The actions that we are taking—chief among them the Scottish child payment—are lowering the cost of raising a child in Scotland, which is positive, and we will continue to look for all possible ways to do that.

In response to the question on what the UK Government could most usefully do, it is to emulate the example of the Scottish Government and introduce its own equivalent of the Scottish child payment.

Hospice Care Sector (Funding)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

There are growing concerns about the financial resilience of hospices across Scotland. The sector faces significant pressures with regard to staffing and energy costs. I met hospice staff in my region who report that they are already supporting the delivery of core services from their reserves. One of the impacts of the pandemic is that more people need to move to palliative care.

Will the First Minister agree to convene urgent talks with the sector and undertake a review of matched funding for the hospice care sector, which has now fallen to one of the lowest levels that we have ever seen?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I will undertake to ensure that discussions take place directly with the sector. The Government will, of course, liaise with the sector regularly on a range of issues. I will ensure that specific conversations take place about the pressures that they are facing, in common with other parts of the voluntary and statutory sectors as well as the national health service, which are all dealing with the impact of increased inflation and energy costs.

Our budget this afternoon will very much have at its heart our determination to help sectors that are delivering those front-line services across the country as much as we possibly can. I will ensure that officials and ministers liaise with the hospice sector to see what more support we might be able to provide.

Student Fuel Bills

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I was contacted this week by a student who had been forced to go to the library the day before her exam because her flat was dangerously cold. Lucy Penman said that she could not afford to keep the heating on for more than an hour and a half; in her words, her

“fingers were losing feeling”. Her friends are in a similar situation. Students across Scotland are struggling with a surge in the cost of fuel bills this winter, and they need urgent intervention from the Scottish Government.

What does the First Minister have to say to Lucy and her friends, who are struggling to keep warm this winter? Will she also commit her Government to support the National Union of Students Scotland’s fighting for students campaign for extra support? Scotland’s students do not need warm words; they want to see real action.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I appreciate how difficult things are right now for students, as they are for everybody given rising energy costs and other inflationary pressures. We provide universities with funding so that they can provide hardship funds to students who need them. Universities should make their students aware of how to access that funding.

We will continue to work with NUS Scotland as we have done over many years to consider how best to support students generally, but particularly in these difficult times. We already do much to support students to ensure that student debt is much lower in Scotland than it is in other parts of the United Kingdom, not least through free tuition.

The fact of the matter is that the driving factors behind increased energy costs do not lie within the powers of this Government. I hope that, one day soon, they will, so that we can tackle so many of these issues at root cause instead of having to continue to deal with just their symptoms.

Displaced Ukrainians (Funding)

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

To ask the First Minister for her response to the update from the United Kingdom Government’s Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities on the funding for displaced Ukrainians and the funding implications for Scotland’s public sector support.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The announcement represents a significant cut in the funding available to deliver public services to those in need. I think that it is counterproductive and short-sighted for the UK Government to make those cuts to the tariff for local councils, and we will be joining with the Welsh Government to make clear our opposition to them.

Right now, Ukrainians displaced by the war need more, not less, support, and we have continually called on the UK Government to extend funding in line with the three-year visa. Of course, Scotland has the highest number of arrivals by population share in the UK as we continue to seek to provide a place of safety; we use our own budget to do that—and we will continue to do so—but the UK Government needs to continue to step up and fulfil its responsibilities, and we will continue to encourage it to do exactly that.

Avian Flu

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

It has been reported that 230,000 birds have been killed in Aberdeenshire following six distinct outbreaks of avian flu, and the chief veterinary officer has said that those outbreaks have occurred after flocks have been housed with

“no concerns over ... management practices.”

The impact on the bird populations is tragic, but there will also be an impact on farmers, so what is the Scottish Government doing to help farmers who fear that their livelihoods are being threatened by this terrible tragedy?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Bird flu is a significant concern right now, and both the chief vet and the cabinet secretary, Mairi Gougeon, are monitoring the situation carefully. The measures that are in place in Scotland are given serious consideration on an on-going basis, and I know that the chief vet has spoken at length on the basis of the decisions that we have taken so far.

It is absolutely right to say that this is having a big impact on farmers, and we will continue to liaise with the farming community on how we best support them through what is an extremely challenging period.

Acorn Project (Update)

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

The threat that Tory ideology poses to Scottish society continues to loom large, and the Tories’ actions pose a direct threat to our drive towards net zero and our combating the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss. Efforts arising from the latest support from the nature restoration fund are being threatened by the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, potentially undermining our ability to protect Scotland’s environment, while a report this week from PwC has revealed that Scotland’s just transition to net zero is at risk from the Tories’ post-Brexit immigration policy.

Can the First Minister update Parliament on any recent discussions that the Scottish Government has had regarding the United Kingdom Government’s investment in the Scottish cluster and the Acorn carbon capture and storage and hydrogen project?

The First Minister

First, the retained EU law bill, which sounds technical and abstract, puts at very real risk the high standards that people in Scotland have come to expect as a result of European Union membership. It threatens to eliminate 47 years of environmental protections, food standards, workers’ rights and much else in the rush to facilitate a deregulated race-to-the-bottom economy. Angus Robertson has written twice to the secretary of state in charge of the bill, including with proposed amendments to limit its damage, but to date there has been no reply.

Of course, the approach to immigration is, as the member has rightly said, also a threat to Scotland’s prosperity and our progress to net zero.

On the issue of carbon capture, utilisation and storage and the Acorn project, we continue to press the UK Government to include the project in its support for carbon capture, and I hope that we will see some positive movement from the UK Government in that respect in the not-too-distant future.

Gender Reform Recognition (Scotland) Bill (Safeguards)

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

A poll this morning revealed that the vast majority of Scots are opposed to your Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill—

The Presiding Officer

Speak through the chair, please.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

—including the removal of key safeguards such as lowering to 16 the age when one can legally change their gender. First Minister, how many more warnings do you need before you listen to the concerns of women and keep the safeguards that currently exist?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, it is for this Parliament to decide whether it passes that legislation, as is the case with any piece of legislation. There is full scrutiny under way right now and, of course, Parliament will next look at the proposals in plenary session next week.

The bill does not create a single new right for trans people; all it does is simplify existing processes. I encourage anyone who has not already done so to read this morning’s comments by the United Nations official who has already given evidence to the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, setting out in detail why, in his view, the bill brings Scotland into line with its international obligations.

There are significant safeguards in the bill. Of course, there are concerns that men may abuse provisions relating to trans people to harm women. However, one of the comments of the UN official is that there is no evidence that that is the case in any of the countries that already have such legislation in place. However, the point is that, if any man was to seek to do so, the bill does not increase their ability to do that. The bill is about making a process that already exists for trans people much more humane and less invasive. Of course, it is for Parliament to consider the many amendments that have been lodged and to reach a final view on the bill next week.

Royal Mail (Industrial Action)

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

The general secretary of the Communication Workers Union has written to the First Minister to seek urgent talks about the future of postal services, as part of a bid to end the on-going dispute with Royal Mail. Will the First Minister meet the Communication Workers Union and give consideration to what steps she can take to defend postal services?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

First, I am happy to consider meeting the trade union. I am not sure whether I have yet received the letter that Katy Clark refers to—I have seen it talked about in the media. Although the matter is not within my responsibility—it is a reserved matter—I would be happy to consider anything that I can do to encourage Royal Mail to resolve the dispute in the interests of postal workers across the country.

My approach to industrial disputes is simple: it is always to get round the table to try to find resolution. That is why, although I acknowledge the many concerns that I know that national health service workers continue to have about the pay deal that is on offer in Scotland, the approach that I and this Government take to these kinds of disputes is what has resulted in Scotland being the only part of the United Kingdom today that does not have strikes in its NHS. So, yes, I will always look to see what I can do to bring resolution to such disputes.

Points of Order

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

In the past, you have been clear that it is a matter of courtesy to the chamber that major Government announcements are made first to this chamber and not to the media.

At 2.25 this afternoon, we expect a budget statement from the Deputy First Minister to this chamber. However, currently, the BBC Scotland website is reporting in detail tax changes that will be brought forward in that budget statement, including increasing the higher rate of tax from 41p to 42p, increasing the additional rate from 46p to 47p and reducing the tax threshold for the top rate from £150,000 to £125,000.

I am sure that you share my concern and dismay that that has apparently been communicated to the media first rather than to the chamber. Will you therefore institute an immediate investigation into the source of that leak to the BBC and ensure that proper courtesy is shown to the members of this chamber by the Government?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I thank Mr Fraser for his point of order. He is quite right: I have made it clear on many occasions that it is my expectation that significant announcements are made to the Parliament in the first instance.

I have not yet had an opportunity to examine the circumstances that Mr Fraser describes. I will do so and report to the chamber in due course.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

The Presiding Officer

I am sorry, Mr Kerr, but Mr Bibby, who is online, raised a point of order before you, so I will take him first.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer—it is a similar one to the point that Mr Fraser raised.

During First Minister’s question time, the BBC’s website has reported the Scottish Government’s plans on income tax. If the information is accurate, it should have been provided to Parliament. Therefore, I also ask that you use your time before the proposed statement to make contact with the Scottish Government to assess the accuracy of those reports and whether the information has been briefed by the Scottish Government, and to consider the implications for the statement this afternoon.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Neil Bibby. As I previously said, I will look into the circumstances and report back to the Parliament.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. On the same issue—

Members

Oh!

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Members may say, “Oh!”, but this is a matter of fundamental respect to the Scottish Parliament. If the very specific details that the BBC reported at 12.39 pm about the contents of the budget are indeed accurate, as colleagues have said, will the Presiding Officer insist, among other things, that the temporary Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy—the Deputy First Minister—apologises to the Parliament?

The Presiding Officer

I thank Stephen Kerr for his point of order. As you will appreciate, I have been otherwise engaged and have not yet apprised myself

of the detail, but I will certainly look into the matter.

There will be a brief pause before we move on to members’ business.

Year of Disabled Workers 2022

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-06755, in the name of Pam Duncan-Glancy, on the Unison year of disabled workers 2022. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament celebrates UNISON and its recognition of 2022 as the Year of Disabled Workers; understands that UNISON is using these 12 months to promote disability in the workplace by highlighting the experiences of its disabled members as well as the value and insight that they bring to the union and workplace; notes that, with 200,000 disabled members, UNISON calls for a greater enforcement of legal rights, including the fundamental right to reasonable adjustments at work; recognises that the main aims of the Year of Disabled Workers include raising awareness of the social model of disability and the importance of changes to the workplace and working practices, explaining the implications of the disability pay gap as well as how it may be addressed, increasing members’ confidence to self-define as disabled, and increasing the number of disabled activists in the union, and thanks UNISON for its continued representation of disabled workers, including in the Glasgow region.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I start by thanking Unison for designating 2022 as the year of disabled workers. It has been a fantastic opportunity to highlight the value that disabled people bring to the workplace, and I am honoured to be able to use my platform to highlight their contribution in the chamber, and to do so in front of Unison members in the gallery.

Over the past 12 months, Unison and its 200,000 disabled members have campaigned to raise awareness of the importance of changes in the workplace to support disabled workers. They have highlighted the disability pay gap, employment gaps and increased confidence in an individual’s right to self-define as disabled. Their continued efforts to support, represent and empower disabled workers across Scotland, including in the Glasgow region, which I represent, are important for the more than 1 million disabled people across our country.

This year has not only been about celebrating the contribution that disabled people make; it has also shone a light into the dark place of the stark inequalities that disabled people face in the workplace. Disabled people are half as likely to get into the workplace in the first place—only 46 per cent of disabled people in Scotland are in work, compared with 81 per cent of their non-disabled peers. Let me be absolutely clear: that gap is not down to a lack of skill or talent or a lack of desire to work; it is down to a fundamental lack of support and failures in the systems and structures that should take account of disabled people’s rights and make reasonable adjustments. Quite frankly, it is down to discrimination.

Disabled people are being failed from the off. The inequality starts when we are young. At the age of 16, disabled people have the same aspirations as their non-disabled peers, but by the time that they reach the age of 26, they believe that nothing that they can do will change their life. We are failing young people at the time when they should be building the blocks to meet their dreams and aspirations. My Disabled Children and Young People (Transitions to Adulthood) (Scotland) Bill seeks to address that, and I hope to have the support of Parliament at stage 1 next year.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Is the true tragedy not that, when the able-bodied community fails to see the imagination, intelligence and wisdom of disabled people and the unique contribution that they can make, we do a great disservice to all our communities?

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I whole-heartedly agree with that statement. I have said often—and possibly once or twice in the chamber—that disabled people are innovative by design, because just getting up in the morning requires innovation. We should not lose that in the workplace or in society.

The older that disabled people get, the longer the list of the ways in which we fail them gets and the more we damage their ability to realise their full potential. If we are to have a fighting chance, we need to end the in-built discrimination that exists in our systems and structures that holds disabled people back.

We also need trade unions, because, as is the case with all workers’ rights, it is trade unions that are at the forefront of the fight of disabled workers, and it is unions such as Unison that fight the injustices that disabled people face every day. This campaign is a shining example of that. It is essential that all employers, colleagues and workplaces know what support must be in place for disabled employees.

We need more workplaces to engage with the disability confident employer scheme, but we also need a scheme in Scotland that has teeth, as the voluntary nature of that scheme means that not enough is being done yet. Employers should not only work to make their workplaces better for their current disabled employees but actively seek to demonstrate inclusive practices in order to attract more disabled workers, so that they can benefit from the potential that such workers can bring.

That is why one of the key goals of the year of disabled workers is to increase disabled people’s confidence in coming out in the workplace. For 43.6 per cent of the workforce, it is simply unknown whether they have a disability, and declaration rates have fallen to 57.6 per cent. That means that almost half of disabled workers do not feel comfortable making their employer aware of their disability, and they are likely to miss out on reasonable adjustments as a result.

Just like anyone else, disabled workers have a right to a workplace and a right to access support. Thanks to a Labour Government, the Equality Act 2010 gives disabled people rights to support at work through the anticipatory duty on employers, and we should always uphold that principle.

We have all heard about fit-for-work assessments. Today, I ask that we use all the Parliament’s powers—including in areas such as procurement, public sector contracting and business support—to ensure that employers are fit to employ. It is essential that Scotland’s disabled workers know what support they are entitled to and what rights they have in the workplace.

Disabled people and their valuable contribution to the workplace have been overlooked for way too long, and that must change. If we are to truly reap the benefits of what Scotland’s disabled workers have to offer, we need bold action that seeks to close the disability pay and employment gaps, that encourage workplaces to be more inclusive and that increases the confidence of disabled people to self-define and talk to their employers about their disability and the needs that come along with it. Above all, we need to do more to celebrate Scotland’s hugely talented disabled workforce.

As I bring my speech to a close, I say this to employers: your workforce will be enriched immensely because of disabled people, so please do all that you can to empower them to tell you about their disability without fear of losing their job or being treated differently. It is your moral, economic and legal duty to do that and to make your workplace open and welcoming for all.

To disabled people across the country, I say this: be proud and be vocal. You have rights, you are innovative by design and employers must not miss out on that. Be proud of your diversity, claim your rights and—yes—join a union.

Finally, I reiterate my thanks to Unison and all its members, and I congratulate them on all the work that they have done so far this year to keep a focus on disabled workers. I make a plea to colleagues in the chamber that we should listen and take note. It is on all of us to work relentlessly to carry on the great work that has started this year and to ensure that disabled workers are employed not just this year but for every year to come.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy for lodging the motion for debate. Her work on disability and social justice is never anything short of impressive, and although the two of us will have ideological disagreements, I am always sure that she makes points that she genuinely believes in, and that she does so for the right reasons. I am glad to have the opportunity to support her motion today.

I am glad that the motion refers to the social model of disability and that it encourages disabled people to self-identify as disabled and to reach out, get support and join their communities. Sadly, there is a current campaign that is trying to claw back progress and promote a regressive medical model, which is completely contrary to what disabled people have been fighting for for decades. There is no register of disabled people, and no disability is experienced in the same way by every person who has the diagnosis. Everyone’s needs and aspirations are different, which is why the social model is important. We need to empower people to know what they need and then ask for it. Importantly, they should do so with the confidence that any adjustments will be made by their employer.

I often think that being disabled should be recognised as some sort of qualification, because the sheer amount of advocacy that is involved just to exist and the life admin that they have to take on would shock and appall those who are unfamiliar with it.

This week, I had the pleasure of visiting L’Arche Highland in

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank my friend Pam Duncan-Glancy for securing the debate, and I commend Unison for running the important campaign. I welcome its representatives to the chamber.

Disability employment is not an issue that can be wished away. It will take assertive action to bring about positive change, and all members of Parliament have a role to play to ensure that there are no barriers to disability inclusion in the workplace. There is a danger that we all pat ourselves on the back and then head off for lunch. However, we do not need just words; we need cross-party working and the Scottish and Westminster Governments need to do more about the issue.

With the Presiding Officer’s permission, I will make three brief points relating to disabled workers. First, we need to ensure that there are as few barriers as possible to entering the workplace. Less than 50 per cent of working-age disabled people in Scotland are in employment, which signals that there is something seriously wrong with the way that we are approaching the issue. That needs to be addressed at various levels by employers, the Government and local government.

We need to make sure that no one is missing out on vital education that helps disabled people to get into employment, and we must ensure that everyone has access to support that develops their employability skills, such as CV building. That, of course, is over and above ensuring that everyone—whether they are disabled or not—has access to the highest level of education that is suitable and available. If we want to encourage disabled people into work, we must give them the tools that are required.

We are living in a potential golden age of flexible working. One of the few positives to come out of the pandemic is that employers are much more comfortable with accommodating, and able to accommodate, working patterns that deviate from the traditional 9-to-5 working day in a centralised office. Working from home or with a hybrid model is becoming the norm, which means that commuting and/or timing constraints can be overcome with little difficulty. That is a perfect opportunity for business to work with the disabled communities to adopt working practices for a lifetime that will encourage them into the workforce, which would benefit both sides.

That brings me to my final point, which is that tackling disabled employment is not a handout to disabled people. There is a massive amount of benefit for business to be gained from the wealth of experience and fresh perspective that disabled people have and that they bring to the employment market. I have found that, often, our society can severely underestimate those who are disabled and assume that a disability of any kind leads to an inability to contribute.

In reality, disabled people are more than capable, and I am sure that all of us will assert that they bring benefits to any place of work—as demonstrated by Pam Duncan-Glancy. No one can disagree that the Parliament benefits greatly from her contributions. I will leave it to others to judge my contribution, but I say that any of my shortcomings—which are many—exist independently of my disability.

I again thank Unison for running its important campaign. I hope that we will go into next year with not only warm words but positive action from all of us.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I congratulate my colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy on securing the debate in recognition and celebration of Unison’s year of disabled workers campaign. Throughout 2022, Unison has campaigned to highlight the experience of disabled members and the value that they bring to their workplaces and call for better enforcement of their legal rights, particularly the right to reasonable adjustments in the workplace.

That campaign is one of many examples in which trade unions are standing up at the moment—as they have done throughout their history—to advocate for good working conditions in the form of accessible, comfortable and safe workplaces for all workers including, most importantly for the debate, disabled workers. It fundamentally shows the value and importance of our trade unions and the trade union movement that they stand for all workers and, even more so, for workers who face significant barriers to making their contribution in the workplace and our society—shattering glass ceilings and glass staircases, as Pam Duncan-Glancy is fond of saying.

We have already heard that the pandemic has fast tracked the need to prioritise accessibility and adaptability in the workplace and brought many of those issues into sharp focus. Sadly, it is still the reality that disabled people face a unique set of challenges in accessing not only employment but education and training that can lead to further employment. The lack of access that disabled people experience means that they can be less likely to have a degree or equivalent qualification and are more likely to be unemployed or in part-time employment due to the barriers that they might face when seeking employment.

In my working life before coming to the Parliament—or, as I sometimes refer to it, my previous life—I worked for Enable Scotland and saw at first hand the extraordinary work that organisations can do to support disabled people into meaningful work. We all have to reflect on the work that is being done in concert with trade unions and organisations such as Enable Scotland to deliver on real and meaningful job support. The reality is that it takes finance, funding and the will of organisations to be able to make the changes that are required, support someone on every step of the journey and ensure that the jobs that they are given are meaningful and suitable for them as a person, not just any job or a job that was considered to be suitable for them by someone who does not have that lived experience.

It is beyond time that we made a clear commitment that work should be truly accessible for all. We have to support and empower employers to make their working practices inclusive for all, irrespective of the barriers that individual employees may face.

We also have to consider going further in order to speed up the process of making workplaces accessible and supportive spaces for disabled workers. We all know that the stark reality is that it is harder for a disabled person to get a job in Scotland than it is elsewhere in the UK. Figures reported by the Office for National Statistics in 2022 noted that Scotland had the widest disability pay gap of any UK nation, which rose to 18.5 per cent earlier this year. We would all agree that that figure is unacceptable, and I am confident that members from all parties across the chamber will want to commit to redoubling efforts to reduce those figures.

That is also why I am pleased that we can make other interventions. I highlight at this stage my colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy’s Disabled Children and Young People (Transitions to Adulthood) (Scotland) Bill. It is a very important bill that could play a crucial role in tackling the disparity experienced in employment between able-bodied and disabled workers. We have to ensure that future generations do not fall into a system with cracks that prevent them from transitioning out of the school system and into education, training or work. I hope that colleagues will look at that bill in great detail when it comes to Parliament.

I encourage the minister, after listening to today’s contributions, to commit to reassessing what specific actions the Scottish Government can take to eradicate the discrimination and inequality experienced by disabled people when they are in the labour market and looking for work and when they are in the workplace. We can and must do better. I put on record once again my thanks to Unison and all our trade unions for the work that they do to support disabled workers day in, day out.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Together with my Scottish Green colleagues, and as a trade unionist, I whole-heartedly welcome the Unison campaign of the

year of disabled workers. I am proud

that the campaign originated in Scotland and that my committee colleague, Pam Duncan-Glancy, has played such a leading role in making it a powerful reality—thank you for bringing this debate to the chamber. I also pay tribute to the work of Unison Scotland disabled members, and thank them for the engaging and informative question-and-answer session that they organised a few weeks ago.

The campaign is of course primarily about improving the working lives of disabled people. In view of the yawning education, employment, and especially pay gaps that the campaign highlights, nothing could be more important. Unison rightly calls upon employers and Governments to do much more, particularly with regard to the collection and publication of data. Without accurate measurement, it is all too easy to be complacent and imagine that we are doing much better than we really are.

Another vital strand of the campaign is about education: educating us all about the realities of disability, of experience, and of policy.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

On that point, does Maggie Chapman agree that a disabled commissioner, which I am proposing, would give that voice to the disabled community? Would she like to sign my proposal so that it can come before Parliament next year?

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

As Jeremy Balfour knows, I have discussed with him previously how it would be best to take that forward. I look forward to further discussions and pledge to engage with him on that over the coming weeks.

We need to focus on education in order to educate us all about the realities of

disability, experience, policy and

how we can be better

colleagues, neighbours and allies. Central to that understanding is an appreciation of the social model of disability. We need to recognise, and remind ourselves and others, that disability does not reside in any impairment itself, but in negative social

responses to it: in embedded barriers, in discrimination and prejudice, and in ableist attitudes and structural exclusions. Individualised, medical and welfare models of disability still predominate in many contexts and still represent—as uncomfortable as it may be to admit it—a social oppression as real as any other.

Along with the social model comes the concept of independent living: the recognition that, with the removal of barriers and appropriate personal support,

both of which are eminently achievable, disabled people can exercise their full and equal rights to live and work and love and play. Those two understandings—of the social model of disability and of independent living—are, I believe, transformative for not

only disabled people but all of us. Inclusion is good for everyone. Those two things also have significant implications for how we see the past, the present and the future.

Crucially, those revolutionary realisations came not from mainstream organisations for disabled people but from groups of disabled people and from grass-roots initiatives that came about in circumstances of great suffering, of extreme oppression and of extraordinary, yet normalised, exclusion. We must not forget that incremental change to a fundamentally cruel status quo brings neither liberation nor justice.

Those insights, which paternalistic agencies were quite unable to achieve, have had a groundbreaking effect on how the rights of disabled people are protected, not least in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which we look forward to seeing incorporated into Scottish law.

That has, or can have, similar effects on how other forms of discrimination and marginalisation are identified and challenged. None of us, however privileged, is entirely independent or able to exercise our rights and freedoms without the support of others. In the intersection between disability and feminist activism, we can recognise and celebrate our universal interdependence, our shared vulnerability and the new spaces that we can fill with hope and creativity.

That knowledge should—and must—inform how we in this Parliament develop policy, enact legislation and do implementation. Educated by the past and present, we need, for our shared future, participation that is wide, deep and serious. We need to acknowledge, with humility and sorrow, the ways in which people who know most about the issue are excluded from decision making. People know about their own lives. We need co-operation, integrity and solidarity in shared struggles, and I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy and Unison once again for the opportunity to remember that.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I, too, thank my colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I know that she has worked tirelessly throughout her career on this cause, and that she will continue to fight for disabled workers and alongside the trade unions that represent them. If there is one thing that I know about working in this place, it is that Pam Duncan-Glancy has plenty of fight.

Unison’s year of disabled workers is a year-long campaign across the UK to improve the working lives of disabled people. As we have heard, the campaign was developed in Scotland following a motion from a Scottish branch, which was then rolled out as a national campaign and supported by the wider trade union movement. That is a real achievement by the Scottish branch. I congratulate Unison on its initiative and on its work throughout the year. Its work to find ways to support and celebrate the diversity of workers in the workplace shows unions at their best.

Before moving on, I must mention the scale of the problem, which my colleague Paul O’Kane spoke about. Unison has provided us with a briefing on the detail, and it is important to know the detail to understand the changes that we need to make. The situation is clear: in Scotland today, disabled people are less likely to be in employment, education or training; they are more likely to have low or no qualifications at Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 4; they are less likely to have a degree or equivalent qualification; they are more likely to be in part-time employment; they are more likely to face additional barriers; they are less likely to work in higher managerial positions; and they are less likely to work in professional occupations. I do not think that any of us is shocked by that, but we should be, because it is absolutely unacceptable.

In my life before coming to the Parliament, I was lucky enough to have a job that allowed me to support and work with many disabled people, the bulk of which was working with adults with learning disability. That group of people inspired me, motivated me and taught me a lot about life, and I am ever grateful for the time that I spent working in that area. I mention that because, looking back, it strikes me just how few of the people who I supported had paid work. That is a sad and unnecessary situation, when I consider how capable, reliable and keen to work those people were.

I am saddened that the employment rate for people with learning disability across the UK has fallen to a low of just 4.8 per cent. It is shocking that only 4.8 per cent of a group of people who are motivated, reliable and want to work are in employment. People with disability have the right to work and it is incumbent on the Government to ensure that the world of work is a welcoming and suitably adjusted environment. The Equality Act 2010 offers a range of protections to disabled people, but workplace discrimination still affects many people across the UK. We must all do more.

I recently visited an impressive social enterprise in my region called the Usual Place. When I clicked on its website, a message said:

“Did you know ... we are a Disability Confident Leader with 70% of our staff force having a disability”.

That is a claim to be proud of. I invite everyone to visit the Usual Place, which provides a cafe, shop and conference facilities that are truly excellent. I recommend a visit. It is in a beautiful setting and has excellent staff and tasty food. The preparations there are about providing real experiences for people.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

rose—

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I will take an intervention from Emma Harper.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

[

Inaudible

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ms Harper, your card is not in, so your microphone was not on. As generous as that compliment was, it will not be on the record.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

My absolute apologies, Presiding Officer.

I just wanted to highlight that the Usual Place is in Dumfries, and I have been there on several occasions. Does Carol Mochan agree that we should encourage people to visit it?

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

Absolutely. I knew that the member would have visited the Usual Place, which

is an experience that all members should have. It has a very high success rate and it should be supported.

The value of Unison’s initiative is clear and it shows the power of a union to raise such important issues up and down the country. I thank Unison and other unions for their support and work to preserve and protect disabled workers. I join Pam Duncan-Glancy in asking disabled workers to join a union. Finally, I repeat my thanks to Pam Duncan-Glancy for allowing us to debate the issue and keep fighting.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

It is a pleasure to congratulate Pam Duncan-Glancy on securing the debate and to thank her for all the work that she does on the issue. It is also a pleasure to speak in the debate as a member and former employee of Unison. I worked as a lawyer for Unison for several years and therefore I am very aware of the work that Unison does to promote and fight for the improvement of the rights of its disabled members. Unison is quite an unusual union in that it was created in the 1990s, which means that equalities have always been at the heart of its work and are seen as a core part of the culture of the union.

I congratulate Unison on making 2022 the year of disabled workers and on using the year to highlight the experience of its 200,000 disabled members. As Emma Roddick said, one of the aims of the year of disabled workers is to raise awareness of the social model of disability and for that model to be used rather than the traditional medical model of disability. Another aim is to raise the importance of the changes that are necessary in workplace and working practices to enable disabled people to work. We know that it is more difficult for disabled people to get employment and that, as the motion says, there is a considerable disability pay gap, with disabled people earning less than others. As Paul O’Kane said, the situation is worse in Scotland. As a Parliament, we need to focus on that.

Paul O’Kane also spoke about barriers that disabled people face in getting access to education. It is more difficult for them to obtain good employment if they do not have the right qualifications and skills. There remains a considerable amount of discrimination against disabled people in our society, particularly in the workplace. More support is needed to ensure that reasonable adjustments are made.

In yesterday’s debate on free rail travel for blind and partially sighted people and companions, members highlighted the importance of public transport in enabling people to get to work and accessing employment and other social connections. That debate was specifically about the 180,000 people living with sight loss in Scotland, but the accessibility of public transport for many disabled people is a key factor in the ability to get to work.

We need to listen to what disabled people—those who have been able to obtain work and those who have not—say about their experiences, so that we can ensure that we take every action necessary to support and enable as many disabled people as possible. We need to include the trade unions in that work on our policy and practice. Organisations such as Unison represent in the region of 200,000 disabled workers, and the other unions also work with their disabled members.

We have heard clearly that Scotland has much to do to rise to the challenge. I look forward to hearing from the minister about the actions that the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that the situation improves.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call the minister to respond to the debate.

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

I thank all speakers for their thoughtful contributions to the debate, particularly Pam Duncan-Glancy, who is the sponsor of the motion and who had powerful insights on the challenges faced by disabled people in Scotland who want to work. Of course, as she and other members have said, there is a loss to Scotland from not making it easy or practicable for disabled people to work and contribute to Scotland’s economy. Those contributions have been very important indeed.

I thank Carol Mochan for reminding me of my excellent visit to the Usual Place in Dumfries, where I met the remarkable staff and workers along with those on placements and others, as well as having a very tasty lunch and meeting members of the public. It was a memorable visit. Many members mentioned various organisations across the country and said that they are doing great work on this agenda.

I congratulate Unison on its work in the year of disabled workers in 2022. Unison undertakes important work in the area, and the Government will continue working with it and other trade unions to achieve our shared objective of improving disabled people’s employment. As members have said, it is important to recognise that disabled people make a hugely significant contribution to Scotland’s economy. It is the morally right thing to do to support more disabled people into and in work.

Our latest statistics on the disability employment gap show that, between 2016, when it was 37.4 per cent, and 2021, the gap has reduced by 6.2 per cent to 31.2 per cent. That reduction was due to a larger rise in the employment rate of disabled people relative to the increase in the employment rate of non-disabled people. That means, we hope, that we are on track to achieve our ambition to halve the gap to 18.7 per cent by 2038.

Last week, as members will be aware, we published our refreshed fair work action plan, which sets out in further detail how we will go about progressing that work. The plan incorporates actions to meet our commitment to at least halve the disability employment gap and enhance disabled workers’ access to and experience of the labour market. The refreshed action plan brings together our original fair work plan, our gender pay gap and disabled people’s employment action plans, and actions from our new anti-racist employment strategy.

There are other strategies—Paul O’Kane challenged me to refer to a couple. I should say that the Scottish Government is working closely with disabled people’s organisations and their members to develop a new disability equality strategy that will build on “A Fairer Scotland for Disabled People”.

We have allocated £5 million of our equality and human rights fund to support disabled people’s organisations, deliver work that is focused on tackling inequality and discrimination, further equality and advance the realisation of human rights in Scotland overall. We are also working with Disability Information Scotland, which is currently creating a step-by-step employment guide that sets out what action disabled people can take if they have problems or issues at any stage of their employment, including recruitment, the interview stages and onwards to employment. That organisation is funded through the Scottish Government. I wanted to give a couple of examples in the light of some of the points that members have raised.

As was the case with our original plan, “A Fairer Scotland for Disabled People: Employment Action Plan”, which we published back in 2018, the refreshed plan endorses the social model of disability, which many members have mentioned. In that model, it is not the disabled person’s impairment or disability that creates barriers; rather, barriers are created by society. We recognise that opinions about self-identifying as disabled can vary; however, employers have a clear legal requirement not to discriminate against disabled people and to ensure that they make reasonable adjustments.

The creation of diverse and inclusive workplaces in this country is central to our fair work first approach. Disabled people should always feel safe to share, where they wish to do so, that they are disabled and whether they require any adjustments that can assist them in their workplace. The fair work action plan also focuses on issues that Jeremy Balfour and others mentioned, including flexible and hybrid working, which was mentioned specifically. Our vision for fair work is shared by the Fair Work Convention, and we want Scotland to be a leading fair work nation by 2025. Of course, we do not have responsibility for employment powers—they lie with the UK Government—but the fair work agenda has an important role to play in the context of today’s discussion.

Alongside our fair work action plan, we share Ms Duncan-Glancy’s ambition to improve the experiences of disabled young people as they make the transition to adulthood. We will introduce Scotland’s first national transitions to adulthood strategy in the current session of Parliament. The member mentioned that she has introduced her own member’s bill. We want to ensure that there is a joined-up approach to supporting our disabled young people as they make the transition to adult life.

The importance of lived experience is reflected in our policies, and members have mentioned how important that is. We very much recognise the importance of drawing on the voice of lived experience in order to listen to what disabled people have told us about the challenges that they face, and so that we can work together to find deliverable solutions.

We developed the new fair work action plan in conjunction with disabled people and representative organisations as well as the other stakeholder groups that we spoke to. Similarly, disabled people informed the development of our charter for our no one left behind approach to employability support.

I will mention a couple of final measures before I close. We are currently reviewing the public sector equality duty in Scotland. Results from our consultation earlier this year showed wide support for the publication of information on the disability pay gap, which is an issue that many members have mentioned today. We will take forward work on the review of the duty in the new year. Back in 2019, the Scottish Government, as an employer, published our “Scottish Government Recruitment and Retention Plan for Disabled People 2019”. As part of the delivery of that plan, we established a dedicated workplace adjustments team for the Scottish Government workforce in January this year.

We have also developed an employee passport, which facilitates conversations between employees and line managers about any circumstances that may impact them at work, including disability. As the Scottish Government, we hope to go above and beyond our legal requirements as an employer. I look forward to working with our trade union movement, which we also support with £2.3 million-worth of funding through Scottish Union Learning; with members on all sides of the chamber; and with all parties, as we try to address the very serious issues that Unison has highlighted during its year of disabled workers, and which Pam Duncan-Glancy has raised in her members’ business debate today. The need to address those issues is supported by members on all sides of the chamber, and I look forward to working with them all to deliver a better deal for Scotland’s disabled people.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

T

hat concludes the debate.

13:33 Meeting suspended.

14:00 On resuming—

Net Zero, Energy and Transport

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio question time. On this occasion, the portfolio is net zero, energy and transport. I remind members that questions 2 and 6 are grouped together, so I will take supplementaries on those questions once they have both been answered. Members who wish to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak button or type “RTS” in the chat function during the relevant question.

Heat in Homes (Hydrogen)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it considers hydrogen, as an alternative to natural gas, to be a viable solution to decarbonising heat in homes. (S6O-01692)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Across the wider economy, we expect hydrogen to play an important role in achieving net zero ambitions, particularly in sectors that are otherwise hard to decarbonise. Although it is possible that hydrogen might play some role in reducing emissions from heating buildings in Scotland, we do not expect that to be a central role. If demonstration and safety trials prove successful, blending of hydrogen and the conversion and repurposing of parts of the network to carry 100 per cent hydrogen might take place. However, at present, those are decisions for the United Kingdom Government, and we urge it to make those decisions soon.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The very trial that the minister mentioned—the H100 project, which aims to showcase hydrogen as a green alternative to natural gas—has failed to entice enough Levenmouth residents to meet its target of 300 households, despite it offering residents £1,000 worth of free hydrogen appliances and promising the same bills as those for gas. I am sure that the minister will agree that only through effective trials can we ascertain whether new technologies can truly help our journey to net zero. What has the minister done in response to the reports? What action will he take to ensure that the possibilities of hydrogen as an alternative to gas are fully explored?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

We are working with the operator that is taking forward the trial and we will continue to liaise with it in response to the reports that have been cited.

However, I go back to my first answer: we are very clear that, although hydrogen might play some role in decarbonising emissions from heating buildings, it is not likely to play a central role. That is in the context of the anticipated rise in demand for export and the significant demand for green hydrogen from other industries, which do not have ready alternatives for decarbonising. In short, we think that the promise of hydrogen tomorrow must not stop us from taking action now with technologies such as heat pumps and heat networks, which are much more likely to play a central role.

Deposit Return Scheme (Drinks Producers)

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how many drinks producers have registered with Circularity Scotland for the new deposit return scheme. (S6O-01693)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The window for drinks producers to register with Circularity Scotland for the new DRS opened this week. The Scottish Government does not hold information on producer registrations, but the DRS regulations require that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, as the independent regulator, maintain and publish a list of all currently registered producers. The first version of that list will be published in March 2023.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

The DRS will be the first scheme of its kind in the United Kingdom and one of the most environmentally ambitious in Europe, but some businesses in my constituency have expressed concerns about the costs of participation at a time when the Westminster-imposed cost of living crisis is hitting hard. Can the minister advise on the action that the Scottish Government is taking to support businesses, especially smaller businesses, to help address their concerns?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

As the DRS administrator, Circularity Scotland is responsible for implementation, but the Scottish Government has been engaging closely with industry to ensure that a pragmatic and efficient approach is taken to implementation.

For example, in direct response to feedback from businesses, we have now published updated guidance and support for those who are applying for exemption from the DRS. In turn, that has allowed Circularity Scotland to revise the producer fees. This week, it announced that producer fees will be 8 per cent, 30 per cent and 40 per cent lower, respectively, for glass, polyethylene terephthalate—PET—plastic and metal containers. Day 1 payments for producers that are using UK-wide barcodes will also be reduced by two thirds. That has been welcomed, particularly by the British Beer and Pub Association. We have also recently announced proposals to bring forward amendments to the DRS regulations, so that only the largest supermarkets will be obliged to provide online take-back. All others will be exempted and, even for the large supermarkets, there will be a phased approach. Lorna Slater communicated all of that to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee this week. Those are all examples of how the Scottish Government is determined to proceed with that environmentally ambitious scheme but, equally, to implement it in a pragmatic way.

Deposit Return Scheme (Launch Date)

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the open letter signed by over 500 businesses asking for the deposit return scheme to be delayed beyond next summer. (S6O-01697)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity responded directly to the letter that the member refers to, addressed concerns raised and confirmed that there would be no change to the launch date of the scheme.

As I said in my previous answer, to Marie McNair, the Scottish Government continues to engage closely with industry to ensure a pragmatic and efficient approach to implementation. I mentioned the updated guidance for retailers and the intended changes to online take-back. We are keen to make the scheme work. We know the benefits that come from DRS. We are committed to the date of August next year for implementation and will work with industry and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency to achieve that.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The smaller drinks producers are especially worried. Earlier this week, I met Own Label Company Scotland Ltd, which is based in Edinburgh and, incidentally, produces whisky for the Parliament. The company wants the deposit return scheme to succeed but faces costs and administration that threaten its survival.

With only nine months until the supposed launch, small firms are still awaiting key information.

Furthermore, the Scottish Government’s review team found that a

“fully functioning and compliant DRS cannot be in operation for the revised August 2023 schedule.”

Does the minister not see that, despite her stating that no change in the launch date is planned, it makes sense to let the large firms, which can manage the launch first, resolve the problems and then launch for smaller firms? Should August 2023 be the timeline to which businesses are working?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I recognise a lot of what the member narrated. In fact, some of the actions that the Government has taken over the piece and, in particular, this week—as communicated to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee—have been about recognising that much of the action should fall on the larger bodies initially. That is inherent in the fact that exemption is available for certain small outlets and the changes that will be made to our regulations for online take-back. That is about targeting the measure at large supermarkets, and even then with a phased approach.

All that demonstrates that the Government is listening. We are committed to August 2023. We are committed to that because the scheme presents the opportunity to collect 90 per cent of containers for recycling, reduce the £46 million of public money that is currently spent on cleaning up litter and reduce CO2

emissions to the equivalent of taking 83,000 cars off the road in the United Kingdom. That is why we must pursue the scheme but, as I have said, we will do so pragmatically, working with industry.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I have a number of members wishing to ask supplementaries. I will be able to take only some of them.

I call Maurice Golden, who joins us remotely.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Today, it was confirmed that key parts of the flagship deposit return scheme are being scaled back ahead of the launch. The Scottish Government’s approach to the secretive and scandal-hit scheme is shocking. It turns out that the Scottish National Party and Greens already knew that a fully functioning scheme was not possible by next August. They were told seven months ago in a report that they kept secret until they were forced to climb down.

Given that other countries have far more quickly launched successful schemes that are cheaper for producers, will the minister confirm how many people with experience of those systems the scheme administrator employs and whether the gateway reviews routinely interview international DRS experts?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Maurice Golden mentioned reviews. The Scottish Government commissions regular reviews of major projects to ensure that issues are identified and addressed. Those of us who are accustomed to delivery are used to that.

The gateway review was undertaken more than six months ago. Since then, significant progress has been made by industry. That, of course, is reflected in the improved position of the assurance of action report in October. Although the most recent report confirms that there are challenges to overcome, it demonstrates an improving picture and confirms the feasibility of the scheme being implemented and in place for August 2023.

Maurice Golden mentioned successful schemes elsewhere that have been implemented more quickly. Perhaps he should have a word with his colleagues in the United Kingdom Government whose scheme is not as ambitious as ours and will not be implemented as quickly as ours. In the meantime, we will get on with delivering this scheme.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I think that the minister has to recognise that the sector’s confidence in the Government’s ability to deliver this scheme is at rock bottom. People in the sector are really concerned about the expense and about whether it can still be done in August. What steps will the minister take to build that confidence back up when they are convinced that, far from being pragmatic and efficient, the scheme is in fact expensive and the Government is intransigent with the date? What is the minister going to do to improve confidence so the scheme can actually work?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I said in response to Maurice Golden that our most recent report confirmed that there are still challenges—nobody is denying that—but it demonstrates an improving picture and confirms the feasibility of the scheme being in place for August 2023.

In the meantime, we are committed to continuing to work with industry, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Circularity Scotland, not least in the ways that I have narrated a number of times this afternoon and as Lorna Slater set out to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee this week.

There is updated guidance supporting those who are seeking an exemption in whole to the scheme. In turn, there has been a substantial reduction in producer fees—8 per cent, 30 per cent and 40 per cent reductions across the different container types—and a reduction in day 1 fees, which have been welcomed by the British Beer and Pub Association.

There is also, of course, the significant commitment by Lorna Slater to look again at online take-back, to restrict it to the largest supermarkets only, and to introduce it on a phased basis.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I will take a brief supplementary from Colin Smyth, and a brief answer please, minister.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

The gateway report is utterly damning. It makes clear that a fully functioning scheme cannot be introduced by the date of August 2023. If the minister is saying that a scheme will be introduced on that date, will it be fully functioning? If not, what will be missing that was in the original proposals?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

In the spirit of brevity, I will just reiterate that our most recent report confirms that there are challenges to be overcome but demonstrates an improving picture and confirms the feasibility of a scheme being in place for August 2023.

Heat in Buildings Strategy

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made on the delivery of its heat in buildings strategy, including decarbonising homes and workplaces. (S6O-01694)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

We published a report in October setting out our progress against the heat in buildings strategy. Since publication of the strategy, we have published our heat networks delivery plan and legislation requiring all local authorities to produce a local heat and energy efficiency strategy in 2023. We have also introduced a grant to replace the cashback element of Home Energy Scotland loans for homeowners.

We intend in 2023 to publish a consultation on our proposals for a heat in buildings bill and to launch our public engagement strategy, to raise awareness and support among the public for this vital transition.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The latest report from the United Kingdom Climate Change Committee issued a stark warning about the Scottish Government’s plans to deliver low-carbon heating sources and improve the energy efficiency of buildings, calling them “wholly inadequate”. That criticism comes at a time when we also learn that the Scottish Government has cut £45 million from the heat in buildings capital grant scheme.

Given that the cost of what is in the Scottish Government’s heat and buildings strategy is estimated to be in the region of £33 billion, what impact does the minister think those cuts will have on the delivery of sustainable homes, and will that be reversed in today’s budget?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

We continue to invest substantially in the energy interventions that we are making, including everything under the heat in buildings agenda.

In the climate change plan update that was published in 2020, it was acknowledged, including by the Government, that we have to go further and faster as we develop the new climate change plan; it is currently under development. In fact, the welcome acknowledgement in the Climate Change Committee’s report demonstrates the need for us to bring to that area the added ambition that we are bringing.

I refer Roz McCall to comments by the British Energy Efficiency Federation, which said in response to our work:

“My advice to Whitehall is simple. Whether you take the high road or you take the low road, you had best be copying Scotland’s initiatives.”

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I have previously raised with the minister the option of modifying rule 3 of the Tenements (Scotland) Act 2004 to the effect that factors and people living in multi-owner properties—which describes 95 per cent of the housing in my Glasgow Kelvin constituency—be empowered to introduce, with the agreement of a simple majority of tenants, energy saving measures such as electric vehicle charging points, solar panels or anything else that is proven to have an impact on CO2

emissions. That simple modification would produce immediate economic and environmental benefits, and there are no obvious downsides to there being no further delay. Would the minister give serious consideration to making that very simple modification, as a matter of urgency?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I am not sure whether I need to declare an interest as a resident in one of the tenements in Kaukab Stewart’s constituency that she referred to.

We are, of course, aware that stakeholders have raised valid concerns about the existing tenant management scheme, which is set out in the Tenements (Scotland) Act 2004. The independently chaired tenement short-life working group has been empowered to consider the issue and, as the member mentioned, we await its recommendations. I am sure that Kaukab Stewart will be keen to discuss that with the Government once the recommendations are available.

To meet what is in our ambitious heat and buildings strategy and in “Housing to 2040” we need communal work in tenements to be carried out in a way that is fair and effective. We will, therefore, fully consider any changes to the TMS before making legislative change.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 4 is from Rhoda Grant, who joins us remotely.

Off-gas-grid Households (Support)

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to support off-gas-grid households during the cost of living crisis. (S6O-01695)

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Minister, I am sure that you have the question in writing before you; it was a wee bit unclear.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I have a note of the question.

The Scottish Government recognises that households, especially in rural and island areas that rely on unregulated fuels for their heating instead of gas, need both general and targeted assistance. Although the powers to support off-gas-grid consumers as regards the price that they pay for higher alternative fuel costs are primarily reserved, we are taking every action that we can with the powers that are available to us, including doubling our fuel insecurity fund to £20 million for the financial year 2022-23 and introducing the new £1.4 million islands cost crisis emergency fund.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

People who live off the gas grid can access air-source heat pumps only through Government schemes for boiler replacement. The cost of retrofitting installation makes that unaffordable for the average household, and far less so for those that are in fuel poverty. Will the Scottish Government reconsider funding BioLPG boilers under the Home Energy Scotland grants for those properties, which will help in reaching net zero while ensuring that those households have adequate heating systems?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I think that the current economic circumstances justify the Government’s intention to move away from fossil fuels, because overreliance on fossil fuels is part of the problem for the very consumers whom Rhoda Grant is rightly concerned about.

The Government has also recently made the package of grants and loans that are available to people much more flexible and attractive, including by a specific rural and islands uplift for the energy efficiency and zero-emission heating elements of that package of grants and loans. I encourage the member to make her constituents aware of that and to encourage them to visit the Home Energy Scotland website for further information.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

According to heating oil supplier J R Rix and Sons Limited, the average price of heating oil has seen a year-on-year increase of 60.5 per cent in 2022. Households that rely on alternative fuels including heating oil and LPG to heat their homes will receive only a one-off £200 payment as part of the alternative fuel payments scheme.

Does the minister share my concern that the United Kingdom Minister

of State for Energy and Climate recently informed the Scottish Parliament’s Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee that the UK Government has no plans to regulate the alternative fuels market in the UK?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I agree with the member, and I share her concerns. The UK Government’s unwillingness to regulate the alternative fuels market will lead to more Scottish households—especially in rural and island communities—being at risk of moving into fuel poverty.

It is also of concern that the alternative fuel payment, which does not come close to meeting the rising cost of alternative fuels over recent months, has not even reached consumers yet, despite having been announced four months ago.

I say again that the whole issue highlights our overreliance on fossil fuels and why it remains absolutely essential that we accelerate our transition to zero-carbon alternatives for heating our homes.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We have a supplementary from Beatrice Wishart, who joins us remotely.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

What pressure can the Scottish Government continue to place on the UK Government to support off-grid customers such as those in my constituency, where the market is less competitive? Will the Scottish Government join Liberal Democrats in calling for a price cap on heating oil to support households through the cost of living crisis and in the longer term?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

As I said in answer to the original question, we call on the UK Government to regulate the alternative fuels market and to ensure that the support that has been committed to is actually made available to people.

However, given our experience over a number of years of trying to get the UK Government even to sit down and talk to us about the added flexibility that we could build in through schemes such as the energy company obligation—ECO—scheme, and given its refusal to negotiate and find better ways of doing things, I think that we will all share the member’s frustration at the UK Government’s unwillingness to work with us on those matters.

Rail Services (North-east Scotland)

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

5. To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it is giving to reinstating rail services to the north east, in particular to Peterhead and Fraserburgh in the Banffshire and Buchan Coast constituency. (S6O-01696)

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

An option for a new rail line between Aberdeen and Ellon and onwards to Peterhead and Fraserburgh was assessed as part of the second strategic transport projects review but did not form part of the final strategic transport investment recommendations. However, I welcome the news that the Campaign for North East Rail recently secured just transition funding to conduct a regional study into the viability of a passenger and freight railway connecting Ellon, Peterhead, St Fergus and Fraserburgh.

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

The Scottish Government has an exemplary record in this area, having reconnected numerous communities throughout the country to the rail network. I am extremely passionate about the Campaign for North East Rail, and it has my full support, but I recognise the challenges that the current situation of extreme financial pressures poses to such a project.

The campaign is currently working on getting its feasibility study up and running. What advice can the minister give the group to ensure that it can develop as strong a business case as possible?

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

Back in June, I travelled to Dyce with Karen Adam and members for other local constituencies to see for myself the difference that extending the rail link back to the north-east would make. It is worth reflecting that the historic Beeching proposals cut off many of Scotland’s communities from direct access to rail, including Levenmouth in my constituency, which in 2024 will be reconnected to the network for the first time in more than 50 years.

Because of the Levenmouth case, I very much recognise the role of rail campaigners and admire their commitment to improving transport connections in their local communities. The collaborative approach that was successfully undertaken on Levenmouth rail link is a good exemplar of building community support. I worked closely with that group as a constituency member, and Ms Adam might wish to meet it to understand the approach taken to build the momentum for its railway. Of course, the CNER is a well-established campaign group and works with local businesses, community organisations and local schools, which will be vital to developing the strong business case that the member speaks of.

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

The Aberdeen to Laurencekirk multimodal corridor study, which was published earlier this year by the north-east of Scotland transport partnership—Nestrans—shows significant public interest in reopening two local train stations in my north-east constituency. That would be a positive development for the local economy, the environment and our emerging renewables sector. What action is the Scottish Government taking in response to the study’s findings, given the commitment in the recently announced STPR2 delivery plan to enhance choice and access to public transport?

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

Transport Scotland officials are meeting Nestrans and its consultants this afternoon as part of the on-going appraisal process to inform its study, which is being funded through the local rail development fund. We will carefully consider the emerging outcomes of the appraisal in the context of our wider investment in Scotland’s rail network. The strategic priorities for rail, as set out in the recently published STPR2, are to decarbonise the remainder of the network, increase the amount of freight that travels by rail and improve connectivity between our major cities.

Strategic Transport Projects Review 2

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

7. To ask the Scottish Government when the final recommendations of the strategic transport projects review 2 will be published. (S6O-01698)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The final recommendations of STPR2 were published, along with a full suite of reports, on 8 December. It represents a key milestone for transport planning in Scotland, setting out a 20-year framework for capital investment to drive the change that we need to meet our ambitious and essential net zero goals.

A delivery plan to provide further insight on prioritisation of the STPR2 recommendations will follow next year, when there is more clarity and greater certainty on the available capital budget and fiscal policy for the coming year.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

To say that the final STPR2 report is a damp squib would be an understatement. It is simply a regurgitation of what we already know.

This week, more than 70 Crocketford residents attended a meeting to voice their fears and anger that no firm commitment has yet been given to road improvements, particularly in the light of a recent accident that could have caused multiple fatalities. Will the cabinet secretary let the good people of Crocketford and Springholm know when the construction of bypasses is likely to begin, because I know that, despite the cabinet secretary’s rhetoric to the contrary, positive talks between the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments are on-going to find a way for the UK to invest in the A75, which is a route of significant importance to the whole of the UK? Will he commit to exploring the option of installing, as a matter of urgency, average-speed cameras to protect the communities from speeding drivers?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I recognise the concerns of Finlay Carson’s constituents, given the recent incident, and my thoughts are with the people who were involved in it. It is important that we take forward the process through the STPR2 mechanism, which has identified improvements to the A75. It builds on the south-west Scotland transport corridor study that was carried out, which identifies a number of areas in which improvements need to be made.

As we have already stated, that will have to fit into our capital spending programme, and we must recognise that capital investment in public sector infrastructure is under considerable pressure for a number of reasons. One of the major reasons for it being under significant pressure is that the UK Government has not kept up with the inflation that it has caused in capital budgets, which means, in effect, that our capital budgets are cut.

If Finlay Carson is really keen to ensure that there is greater investment in the Scottish trunk road network, he should be speaking to his bosses in London and asking them for more capital budget to allow us to do that. I assure him that, if the UK Government, after it has finished wrecking the economy and pushing up inflation, gets round to providing additional capital expenditure to invest in our trunk road network, the Scottish Government will be able to do exactly that across the whole of Scotland.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The STPR2 makes commitments to realign the roads around Springholm and Crocketford and to realign the Cuckoo Bridge roundabout. It is a huge issue for us in the south-west of Scotland, and those are welcome commitments, but I press the cabinet secretary on whether it is likely that the Scottish Government’s budget will include funding for work on those recommendations to be carried out in the coming financial year. When can we see shovels in the ground?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The challenge has been the delayed budget from the UK Government, which has a direct impact on our ability to manage our own budget. We had intended to publish a delivery plan alongside STPR2 but, because of the economic and political chaos that was created by the UK Government, the whole process has been delayed, and it will be next year before we can publish the delivery plan that goes with STPR2. The delivery plan will set out the areas in which investment will be made, including areas such as the A75 and other parts of the trunk road network across Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I can squeeze in question 8 if we have brief questions and answers to match.

CalMac Ferries (Meetings)

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport last met with CalMac representatives. (S6O-01699)

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

As ferries sit in the Minister for Transport’s portfolio, I regularly meet CalMac representatives. I will next meet them this afternoon.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I thank the minister for that answer, and I put on record my thanks to CalMac staff, who are working incredibly hard in the toughest of conditions, with creaking infrastructure.

Through no fault of their own, CalMac staff are employed, through a very peculiar arrangement, as part of a subsidiary on Guernsey. Given that CalMac is a Scottish-owned company that is funded by the Scottish Government and the Scottish taxpayer, which is subsidised by the Scottish taxpayer and which operates in Scotland, the reasons for such peculiar arrangements are not entirely clear. In her response, will the minister please enlighten the chamber as to why CalMac staff are employed through a company in Guernsey and what financial benefit the company may be receiving from doing so?

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

I think that the arrangements in question are historical arrangements.

With regard to the specifics of the governance arrangements, Mr Greene will be aware that, in September, I published the project Neptune report. A few weeks ago, members from across the Parliament met Ernst & Young to talk about some of the changes that were proposed in that report. That report looks at a potential restructuring of the current governance arrangements, and I am sure that the issues that Mr Greene has raised will be addressed in due consultation with local communities, to ensure that they receive the services that they should expect to receive in relation to the delivery of CalMac’s services on the west coast of Scotland.

Budget 2023-24

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good afternoon. Members will be aware of my response to the points of order that were raised at the end of First Minister’s question time regarding information related to this afternoon’s budget statement. I said at that point that I would investigate the matter. I have been unable to conclude my deliberations in the time available, so I suspend the meeting for 30 minutes.

14:31 Meeting suspended.

15:11 On resuming—

The Presiding Officer

I cannot express strongly enough

my disappointment at information about this afternoon’s statement appearing in the media before being given to the Parliament. I have spoken to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to express my concern in the strongest possible terms, and they have given me a categoric assurance that that information was not shared by the Government. In the interests—[

Interruption

.] Excuse me, members. Thank you.

In the interests of parliamentary scrutiny and so that members are not disadvantaged, I will allow the statement to be made so that full information about the budget is available to members, public services and the public.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am grateful to you for your ruling on the matter, but you may not be aware that, in the past few moments, yet more information has been released by the BBC in relation to the content of the budget statement. The BBC is advising us that the additional dwelling supplement of the land and buildings transaction tax is to be increased from 4 per cent to 6 per cent. It is also advising that there could be £500 million extra for local government.

It is clear that there has been a comprehensive briefing from the Government to the BBC on the contents of the budget.

This is now beyond a joke. This is not the first time that the Government has been caught spreading information to the media in advance of bringing it to the Parliament, and disrespecting the Parliament and its procedures.

Presiding Officer, I ask you to consider what further action might be taken against the Government in the light of the further information that has now come to light.

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr Fraser. It is extremely important that we continue with the business in front of us, given the delay that we have already experienced. I will look into the matters that Mr Fraser has raised at a later point.

The next item of business is a statement by John Swinney on the Scottish budget 2023-24. [

Interruption

.] I am simply not going to speak if members will not give me the courtesy and respect of being quiet while I do so. Each and every member deserves that courtesy and respect.

The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Presiding Officer, I will say openly to Parliament what I have said to you privately in the welcome conversation that we have had: at no stage has anybody been authorised on my behalf to brief information—[Interruption.]

The Presiding Officer

Members. It is extremely important that we hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Presiding Officer, I will reiterate what I have said to you privately: at no stage has anybody been authorised to disclose any information that is contained in the budget statement on my behalf.

Inevitably, a large number of people have to be involved in the preparation of a Government statement, from the many officials who are involved to people from a range of organisations. I give you my categorical assurance, as a member of this Parliament since its foundation in 1999, that no individual was authorised on my behalf to disclose any information. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members! Excuse me, Mr Swinney.

I simply will not have members shouting discourteous comments to one another across the chamber. Please remember that we are elected representatives, who are elected by the people of Scotland. I ask all members to bear that in mind and think about that with regard to their conduct in this chamber.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Presiding Officer, in the light of your understandable concern about this matter, I unreservedly apologise to you for the situation in which you find yourself, in protecting the integrity of Parliament and the ability of Government to explain its policy position to Parliament, which it is in the interests of ministers to make sure that we are able to do.

Before I come to the statement, I will point out that, in relation to the detail that Mr Fraser has just put into the public domain, some of that information was contained in the embargoed statements that I make available in advance to other political parties. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members. Thank you.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I simply point out that those factors need to be considered in this whole process.

The Scottish Government budget for 2023-24 takes place in the most turbulent economic and financial context that most people can remember. War is taking place in Europe, which is leading to the suffering and displacement of millions of Ukrainians. As a result of the conflict, energy and fuel prices are surging. Inflation is now corroding our economy, having reached a 40-year high. If those challenges, which are faced by countries around the globe, were not enough, the United Kingdom has added to the turmoil with a disastrous approach to Brexit, which has damaged labour supply, through the loss of free movement of people, and undermined frictionless trade with our nearest markets.

All of those difficulties have been compounded by the utterly catastrophic decisions of the United Kingdom Government in the September mini-budget, which have driven increases in interest rates, saddled the country with much higher debt and undermined the public finances for generations to come.

In short, these are spectacularly difficult times in which to manage the public finances. These times require Governments to lead, make choices and decide what matters, and that is what this Government has resolved to do.

As Parliament knows, those hard realities are not just about future years—I am wrestling with those challenges right now. Before I set out our financial plans for the forthcoming year, I must provide Parliament with an update on this financial year, given the extreme pressure that the Scottish Government budget faces at the present moment.

As a result of soaring inflation, we have faced significant and entirely understandable pay demands from public sector workers. In response, we reallocated over £700 million more than was originally budgeted, in order to enhance pay uplifts to better reflect the increased cost of living and, especially, to tackle low pay.

We continue to deal with the unforeseen, but accepted, costs of resettling refugees who are fleeing the illegal war in Ukraine. We have seen thousands of people in Scotland open their homes in response to war, which is an example of our country at its very best. Scotland will always play our part in supporting those fleeing conflict and persecution. We have made, and are continuing to make, financial provision to support Ukrainian resettlement costs.

The public sector is not in any way immune from the rising costs of energy and inflation, which place additional, real pressures on the value of our budget.

As a result of those factors, in the autumn, the Scottish Government had to make unprecedented reductions to our spending plans, totalling £1.2 billion, midway through the current financial year. We had to do that because, once a financial year commences and in the absence of borrowing powers to address in-year volatility or the ability to alter income tax rates midway through a financial year, we operate a largely fixed total budget unless the United Kingdom Government allocates any additional resources to Scotland. Despite repeated requests, no additional resources have been forthcoming for this year.

The emergency budget review allowed us to meet the costs of increased public sector pay and provide further help to those most impacted by the cost of living crisis. Taken together, in 2022-23, the Scottish Government has allocated almost £3 billion to help to mitigate the cost of living crisis in these difficult days. However, there are two key points that I must advise Parliament about in relation to the budget for this current financial year.

First, despite reductions in spending of £1.2 billion, the financial pressures are so great that I am still working to find a path to fully balance this year’s budget. Secondly, as a consequence of that issue, for the first time since this Government took power, I am announcing a budget today for the next financial year assuming that we will not carry forward any fiscal resources from this year into next. For comparison, our budget for this year was underpinned by £450 million of resources that were carried over from the previous year. The absence of that carryover increases the scale of the financial challenges that we face in the next financial year.

Our budget decisions take place against assessments of deterioration in the economy. I am grateful to the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Scottish Fiscal Commission for their engagement in our budget process. I am, of course, incorporating into the budget the projections made by the Scottish Fiscal Commission.

The UK economy has already begun to contract. The OBR estimates that the UK has entered a recession that will last for more than a year and see gross domestic product fall by 2 per cent. The Scottish Fiscal Commission is expecting the Scottish economy to follow the UK into recession in 2022, with GDP falling 1.8 per cent between quarter 1 of 2022 and quarter 3 of 2023. The commission forecast the recession in Scotland to be similar to that in the rest of the UK. According to the latest data, which was published yesterday, inflation now stands at 10.7 per cent. Last month, we saw inflation in the UK at its highest since 1981. Businesses and households are facing additional pressures from rising interest rates, with the Bank of England base rate reaching 3.5 per cent today following the largest increase since 1989.

Real household disposable incomes are estimated to fall back to 2013 levels, which is the largest fall since records began. To compound matters, our labour market has been experiencing shortages—in part driven by Brexit—as the economy has reopened from the pandemic. As the recession takes hold, unemployment is projected to gradually rise to reach a peak of 4.7 per cent at the end of 2024. In its November economic outlook, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development forecast that the UK will see the worst economic performance in the G20 other than Russia’s in both 2023 and 2024.

The calamitous choices made by successive UK Governments have made our economy weaker and put the public finances under tremendous strain. In November, the UK Government set out revised tax and spending plans in its autumn statement, which was an urgent attempt to repair the damage of the mini-budget. Although that brought some improvements to our resource position for 2023-24 compared with the UK Government’s published plans, our budget will still be lower in real terms than it was in 2021. The outlook for future years is looking particularly bleak in 2025-26 and 2026-27, being the latter two years of the Scottish Government’s resource spending review period.

That is the economic and fiscal context in which the Scottish Government must make our choices for the forthcoming financial year. In formulating this budget, I have reached out to all political parties in this Parliament, to our partners in local government, to trade unions and to many stakeholders in the private, third and public sectors to hear their views. I am grateful to our partners in the Scottish Green Party for their constructive and collaborative approach as we have developed these tax and spending plans in line with our shared commitments in the Bute house agreement.

Four important factors are relevant in considering our decisions. First, the enormous pressures on the public finances mean that, in some cases, it will take the Government longer to deliver on our plans. We will work with partners to minimise that effect.

Secondly, the requirements for public sector reform, which were set out in the medium-term financial strategy and the resource spending review, will be ever more required in this context, and the Government will set out further plans for it in due course. We will take forward an agenda that is consistent with the principles of the Christie commission, with a significant emphasis on early intervention and prevention, as we work to create person-centred public services.

Thirdly, the significant increases in input prices and energy costs mean that our capital budget will be unable to deliver as much as would have been judged possible just a few months ago. The Government will keep these factors under constant review as we take forward the capital programme.

Fourthly, given the uncertain inflation outlook and the need to still conclude some pay deals for the current year, I am not publishing a public sector pay policy for 2023-24 at this stage. We will, of course, continue to collaborate with trade unions and public sector employers on fair and sustainable pay, and will look to say more on our approach for 2023-24 in the new year.

The Scottish Government, like Governments all over the world, is faced with a difficult set of choices. Through this budget, we are facing up to our responsibilities while being open with the people of Scotland about the challenges that lie ahead. To govern is to choose, and the Scottish Government has made its choice. We have chosen not to follow the path of austerity that is the hallmark of the United Kingdom Government—but let me be clear: the choices that we face are all the starker because of the United Kingdom Government.

Within the powers available to us, we will choose a different path—one that sees the Scottish Government commit substantial resources to protect the most vulnerable people of Scotland from the impacts of decisions and policies that are made by the UK Government.

We choose to do everything in our power to eliminate child poverty, because in doing so we improve the lives of children and families in Scotland today while also laying the foundations for a more equal and prosperous country in the future.

We choose to prioritise the transition to net zero, because it is precisely through that transition that Scotland will realise its economic potential, not in spite of it. A stronger, fairer, greener economy benefits everyone.

We choose to stand firmly alongside the Scottish people, investing in our public services and doing everything possible to ensure that no one is left behind. All of us need to know that our public services will be there to meet our needs, and we must invest in them to make sure that that promise can be fulfilled. In particular, we must target investment towards our national health service, which is facing unprecedented pressure following the pandemic.

We do that by choosing a different, more progressive path for Scotland. That is why this budget strengthens the social contract between the Scottish Government and every citizen of Scotland, for the wider benefit of society. That social contract means that people in Scotland will continue to enjoy many benefits that are not available throughout the United Kingdom, including free prescriptions, free access to higher education and the Scottish child payment. It also means that in Scotland families are shielded, as far as possible, from the welfare cuts and austerity policies of the UK Government.

Because we know that this progressive model works, we choose the path where people are asked to pay their fair share, in the knowledge that in so doing, they help to create the fairer society in which we all want to live.

The limited powers that we won after the independence referendum in 2014 enable Scotland to make different choices on tax and on some elements of social security. The Scottish Government has made use of those powers in the past. In total, the decisions that we have taken since the devolution of tax powers and the proposals that I am putting forward today will raise around £1 billion more next year than if we had followed UK tax decisions.

We have also used those powers in creating a social security system that is based on the values of dignity, compassion and respect. This year, we introduced the Scottish child payment—the only measure of its kind available in the United Kingdom—to support children who are living in poverty. It was first introduced at a rate of £10 per week per eligible child under the age of six and it was then doubled to £20 per week from April 2022. In November 2022, it was extended to eligible children under the age of 16 and increased to £25 per week, meaning that the payment has increased by 150 per cent in just eight months. The Scottish child payment is now available to around 387,000 children in Scotland, and I confirm that the payment will remain at that increased level of £25 per child per week.

I am also pleased to announce that all other social security benefits under the control of the Scottish Government will be increased by the rate of inflation in September of 10.1 per cent.

In the face of the extraordinary challenges that we face, we have chosen to use our tax powers again, to protect our country from the harm that is being caused by the turmoil of these times and from the damaging decisions of the United Kingdom Government. Our approach to taxation continues to be guided by our values and by the principle that the tax burden should be proportionate to the ability to pay. That commitment to fairness underpins the choices that we have made throughout this budget, and it underpins our whole approach to taxation.

In this budget, we are asking people on higher incomes to contribute more in taxation than those on lower incomes. The majority of people in Scotland will still pay less in taxation than if they lived in the rest of the United Kingdom. By these decisions, everyone in Scotland will be able to enjoy the benefits of strong public services and a comprehensive social contract.

On income tax, I intend to maintain the thresholds for the starter and basic-rate bands at their current levels. I confirm that I will maintain the higher-rate threshold at its current level and that I will lower the top-rate threshold from £150,000 to £125,140. I also intend to make no changes to the starter, basic and intermediate rates, to protect those on lower incomes.

I have decided to increase the higher and top rates of tax by 1p each to 42p and 47p. As a result, we are asking all those earning more than £43,662 to pay an extra penny in the pound on income tax. I want to be clear that that extra penny is being raised for a specific purpose. We have taken the decision to enable us to exceed the health resource Barnett consequentials from the UK Government with substantial additional investment in the national health service—an investment that will benefit us all. It is, in short, an extra penny to enable spending on patient care in our national health service.

On land and buildings transaction tax, there will be no changes to the main residential and non-residential rates and bands next year. Today, legislation will be introduced to increase the rate of the additional dwelling supplement from 4 per cent to 6 per cent, raising much-needed additional revenue while protecting opportunities for first-time buyers. That change will apply with effect from 16 December to address any potential for forestalling, with a transitional provision in place.

I can also announce today that we will increase the standard and lower Scottish landfill tax rates from 1 April, maintaining consistency across the United Kingdom, guarding against waste tourism and supporting our ambitions for a more circular economy.

The Scottish Fiscal Commission forecasts that the income tax policy changes that I have outlined today will raise £129 million in 2023-24. In addition to that, the Scottish Government estimates that freezing the higher-rate threshold has added £390 million when compared with inflation.

The SFC also forecasts that the changes to the additional dwelling supplement will raise an additional £34 million in revenue in 2023-24. We estimate that, taken together, those changes will provide £553 million in 2023-24 for investment in public services in Scotland.

In the current challenging economic context, I recognise the pressures that businesses face and the difficult conditions that they are working in to create employment and growth in our economy. Sixteen business organisations came together to ask me to take one particular step to support businesses through these tough times. Their number 1 ask was that I freeze the non-domestic rates poundage at 2022-23 levels.

On non-domestic rates, I can confirm that we will protect businesses from the full impact of inflation by delivering a freeze to the basic property rate. That will ensure that Scotland has the lowest poundage in the United Kingdom for the fifth year in a row, and the measure is forecast to save business rate payers £308 million compared with the level of an inflationary increase.

We will reform and extend the small business bonus scheme to improve the progressivity of the relief, while ensuring that it remains the most generous small business relief in the United Kingdom and that it delivers our manifesto commitment that 100,000 properties will be taken out of rates altogether.

By introducing transitional reliefs, we will help to ensure that those properties that see their rates liabilities increase significantly following the revaluation do so in a phased manner. We will use our approach to non-domestic rates to assist the transition to net zero as we incentivise investment in renewables through the introduction of new prescribed plant and machinery exemptions for on-site renewable energy generation and storage.

Investment—whether it be in the low-carbon economy or more broadly—is central to building a strong economy and the fairer and more equal country in which we all want to live. I now turn to that investment.

In formulating a budget in this period of huge challenge, it is vital that the Government sets out its clearest priorities. That is necessary to give clarity to our partners in local government, the private and third sectors and public bodies about our direction—about what matters to the Government.

Through our programme for government and the budget, we are focused on eradicating child poverty, transforming the economy to net zero and creating sustainable public services. We do not view those as three competing objectives; we view them as linked priorities that are a means of supporting families, creating new economic opportunities, protecting our environment, and offering protection and support to every citizen in Scotland through our public services.

Much of what the Government wishes to achieve for Scotland aligns with what local authorities wish to achieve for their communities. However, too often, valuable time and energy are taken up in fractious debates about resources and accountability for spending them. The Government will invite our partners in local government to work with us in building on our jointly produced Covid recovery strategy to create a more effective way of working together that will focus on the outcomes that matter to people, with more flexibility, reduced reporting and greater assurance. We want to enable that new partnership by giving our commitment to the financing of local government, so instead of providing the flat-cash position that is set out in the resource spending review, we are now increasing the resources that are available to local government next year by more than £550 million.

Furthermore, I confirm that the Scottish Government will not seek to agree any phase or cap in locally determined increases to council tax, as requested by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and council leaders. That means that each council will have full flexibility to set the council tax rate that is appropriate for its local authority area. I encourage councils, when setting future rates, to consider carefully the cost pressures that members of the public face.

Earlier this year, the Government set out its plan to tackle child poverty in “Best Start, Bright Futures”. The title of the plan says it all. We want to ensure that children get the best start in life and that they are able to fulfil their potential. In this budget, that means: sustaining investment in the baby box; providing 1,140 hours of early learning and childcare to all three and four-year-olds and eligible two-year olds; committing £200 million to Scottish attainment challenge funding to deliver excellence and equity in education; and tackling school holiday hunger with investment of £22 million to provide meals during school holidays to children who need them most.

That builds on our on-going expansion of free school meals to all primary 6 and 7 pupils who are in receipt of the Scottish child payment, and is the next step in fulfilling our commitment to universal provision in primary schools from August 2024.

We recognise that some of the children in poverty whose life chances face the greatest challenges are those who have experience of care. The budget will deliver a further £30 million investment to keep the Promise, and £50 million investment in a whole-family wellbeing programme to provide holistic preventative family support to give our children who face the greatest challenges the greatest opportunity to realise their potential.

A crucial element of helping families out of poverty is provision of the opportunities and integrated support that parents need in order to access, sustain and progress in work. We recognise that some people face greater challenges than others in entering the labour market, so we are increasing investment in the no one left behind strategy and the fair start Scotland programme.

Employment opportunities are crucial, particularly in these difficult economic times, so the transition of our economy to net zero must be undertaken in a just and fair way that enables people, communities and businesses in Scotland to thrive and prosper. Those opportunities must exist in every single part of Scotland. The approach will be delivered through initiatives including the £366 million planned investment in the heat in buildings programme to decarbonise heating, the £34 million Scottish industrial energy transformation fund and the £26 million low-carbon manufacturing challenge fund.

Investment in our natural environment will support the journey to net zero with a £26 million programme of peatland restoration, £77 million for woodland planting and £44 million to help Scotland to become a global leader in sustainable and regenerative agriculture.

We will support the transition to net zero by investing a further £244 million in the Scottish National Investment Bank; by investing £50 million to deliver the next phase of the just transition fund for the north-east and Moray, which will more than double this year’s allocation; and by investing in the tech scaler programme throughout Scotland to support our efforts in innovation.

As the Climate Change Committee recently highlighted, decarbonisation of transport remains one of the key challenges that we face in reaching net zero. We will support those efforts by working with the private sector to extend Scotland’s electric vehicle charging infrastructure with investment of £60 million; with expenditure of £1.4 billion to maintain, operate and decarbonise our rail infrastructure; by investing nearly £200 million in active and sustainable travel; and by providing £15 million as part of our fair fares review for a six-month pilot that will remove peak-time rail fares as a way of making rail travel more affordable and attractive to travellers.

Ferry services are vital in sustaining connectivity with our island communities, so the budget includes £440 million to support lifeline services. I am also allocating £15 million in this financial year and £57 million in the next financial year to support the completion of vessels 801 and 802 at Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Ltd, along with the resources that are required to build the two new Islay class vessels that are under construction, and a further two vessels of the same type that are currently in procurement.

We must have a skills, training and research environment that enables our people and businesses to realise their potential. For that reason, we have increased the resources that are available to the college and university sectors by £26 million and £20 million to support that.

Many of our public services are on a journey to recovery following the acute phase of the pandemic—none more than the justice system. We want people to live in safe communities in which we act early to reduce the potential for harm, support victims of crime and act swiftly to bring the perpetrators of crime and violence to justice. As part of the budget, I intend to increase the resources that are available to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service by £13 million, and to our wider justice system by £165 million. That will provide resources to tackle court backlogs, to strengthen legal aid provision and to increase funding of police services by £80 million.

The most precious of our public services—the one on which all of us depend—is our national health service. We recognise the challenges that the NHS faces, and the pressures that are borne by the outstanding public servants who work in the NHS. That is why we have offered a formidable pay settlement to staff in the NHS.

Supporting our NHS boards remains a top priority and, in the year ahead, we will invest more than £13 billion to allow them to continue to drive forward the five-year recovery plan. The reform of key services will continue. That will be backed by £2 billion to establish and improve primary healthcare services in the community. In parallel, we will provide £1.7 billion for social care and integration to improve services, while paving the way for the introduction of the national care service.

An additional £100 million will be made available to support delivery of the £10.90 real living wage for adult social care, which will build on the increase that was provided in 2022-23. Social care is vital work, and it is important that people on the front line are supported.

We remain committed to addressing the on-going public health emergencies and reducing the avoidable harms that are associated with drugs and alcohol. By investing £160 million, we will ensure that that important work continues. That is part of our commitment to provide £250 million of additional funding over the course of the parliamentary session to address the drug deaths emergency.

If we want to be able to depend on the national health service, we must be prepared to pay for it. When the UK Government set out its autumn statement, that gave rise to consequential funding for the NHS in Scotland of £291 million. I intend to pass on that funding consequential, but I do not believe that it is nearly enough for the crucial task that we ask our staff in the NHS to do. As a result of the choices that I have made on income tax, I am in a position, in one year, to increase the amount that we spend on health and social care in Scotland by more than £1 billion.

In the resource spending review, the Scottish Government committed to making £20 million available to fund the cost of a referendum on Scottish independence. The Government believed that to be a necessary investment to ensure that the people of Scotland would have the opportunity to express their democratic right to self-government. The Scottish Government respects the decision of the Supreme Court, but it still believes that the people of Scotland must have the opportunity to have their say in a democratic referendum, in line with our clear mandate. When that opportunity is available, the Scottish Government will make financial provisions for that to happen. However, at this moment, I must make full use of the resources that are available to me.

One of the reasons for my believing that Scotland will be a successful independent country is the energy wealth that we enjoy. Scotland is a country with an abundance of renewable energy opportunities, but the travesty is that, despite that strength, too many of our people languish in fuel poverty. In order to help our most vulnerable citizens, I intend to utilise the finance that was earmarked for a referendum on independence to make provision to extend our fuel insecurity fund into next year. That will mean that a further £20 million will be available to address yet another failure of the United Kingdom Government and its policies.

This budget takes place at a time of enormous challenge and difficulty for people and business, due to volatility in the economy and the corrosive effect of inflation. Many people in our communities—the people who send us here—are suffering real and enduring hardship, and all that is happening at a time when our country needs to adapt to the challenges of net zero and face the hard reality of severe constraints in the public finances.

In that context, the Government has decided to use our scope to take distinctive decisions to the greatest extent that we believe is possible at this time. We have chosen to reject the path of austerity. We have chosen a progressive path instead: to invest in our people, to invest in our economy and to invest in our public services. Those are the choices that we have made—the choices for our future—and I commend the budget to Parliament.

The Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 60 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. Members who wish to ask a question should press their request-to-speak buttons.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Rather unusually, Presiding Officer, I begin by thanking you for taking the matter of the leaking of the budget to the press very seriously. There is no doubt that it was a very considerable discourtesy to Parliament, and one that I have never come across before in my time in this place. As a result of that, it has been extremely difficult for Opposition members to view the budget. I am sure that there are members across the chamber who will want you to fully investigate why that was allowed to happen.

I again acknowledge the very tight fiscal circumstances confronting the cabinet secretary as he has embarked upon making the tough decisions that he has outlined, but it is about time that John Swinney stopped blaming the UK Government for every single predicament in which he finds himself. He has had more money at his disposal than he has been prepared to admit and, as the Fraser of Allander Institute reminded us at the weekend, the block grant money from the UK Government more or less covered the inflationary pressures on him.

Mr Swinney also knows that—discounting all the additional Covid spend from the UK Government in the previous two years—he has had record block grant funding from the UK Government for the current financial year and that the Scottish Government will receive an additional £1.6 billion of resource spending in the next two financial years, which will give direct support to our schools and hospitals.

Mr Swinney tells us today that the Scottish Government has been forced into using its own powers to the greatest extent. Those powers have been there throughout the whole time that the SNP has been in government, but it has not been using them to deliver on the clear priorities of the Scottish people: supporting household incomes and jobs; sustained and consistent support for our business and high streets; and the delivery of our public services. Many of those services are delivered by local government, which we know recently wrote a very strong letter to John Swinney outlining the extent of the huge pressures that it is under as a result of the SNP cutting funding over several years.

If Mr Swinney raises taxes, the public will want to know why they see only cuts and a deterioration in the delivery of public services. If he widens the tax gap for middle and higher earners in Scotland in comparison with their UK counterparts, he risks undermining the potential for economic growth that this country so desperately needs.

The Scottish Conservatives very much look forward to the forthcoming stage 1 process, in which we will set out where Mr Swinney can further reprioritise money to front-line services, including local government, policing and net zero. That is a re-prioritisation that means withdrawing the huge spending commitment to the national care service, which very few stakeholders want at all, and removing the commitment to a bogus referendum.

In the meantime, what analysis has Mr Swinney undertaken of the likely impact on tax revenues and on economic growth in Scotland that will result from middle and higher-income earners paying more tax per head than their counterparts in the rest of the UK, given that we know from the Scottish Fiscal Commission that the devolved tax powers used so far by the Scottish Government have not delivered any more tax revenue than would have been the case had taxes been set by Westminster?

Secondly, I note that the total budget for education and skills has been increased for the coming year by just under £100 million. As I understand it, that is not the full extent of the Barnett consequentials delivered to the Scottish Government for education. Will Mr Swinney confirm where the rest of that money is? It may be in local government budgets, but it is important that that is spent on education.

It is obviously very good news indeed that the Scottish Government has finally withdrawn the £20 million that was to be spent on an independence referendum. As well as reprioritising that money, has Mr Swinney also reprioritised the activities of the 25 civil servants who were working on it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That was a very confused contribution from Liz Smith. Let me work my way through it.

Just a few months ago, Liz Smith wanted me to follow the budget of Kwasi Kwarteng and cut tax immediately. Look at the carnage that that has created in the UK economy.

At the weekend, Kwasi Kwarteng told us that they all got carried away. They blew it. Well, that lot over there on the Conservative benches wanted me to follow their stupid and foolish example. Thank goodness I never did it.

When I look at some of the points that Liz Smith put to me, I note that, on business support, she did not welcome the fact that I have frozen business rates, despite the fact that 16 business organisations asked me to do that. That might have merited a welcome. She said that we have not put in place support for business. We have the best small business scheme in the United Kingdom.

When it comes to the tax forecasts, Liz Smith will be able to read the Scottish Fiscal Commission’s report. It has given us projections about growth in income tax on earnings in the years to come as the Scottish economy strengthens. That is another thing that Liz Smith might get round to welcoming.

Then we come to education consequentials. How on earth am I supposed to boost the budget of local government, which provides education in our country, if I do not use the consequentials that are set out for that purpose?

Lastly, on the obsession that Liz Smith has with the £20 million for the independence referendum—[

Interruption

.] She is absolutely and completely obsessed by the whole thing. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am beginning to get worried about her obsession with it.

I confirmed that, in order to deal with the fuel poverty that exists in our country, the punishing inflation that people are wrestling with and the sky-high energy costs that have been fuelled by the mismanagement of the United Kingdom’s energy and economic policies by Liz Smith’s allies in the United Kingdom, I am allocating that resource to support those who are in fuel poverty. Surely the Tories could welcome that.