Scottish Parliament, 10 January 2023

323 contributions from 70 members. The official report.

Time for Reflection

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is time for reflection. Our time for reflection leader today is the Rev Susan Henderson, Inverclyde United Reformed Churches.

The Rev Susan Henderson (Inverclyde United Reformed Churches)

Presiding Officer and members of the Scottish Parliament, thank you for the opportunity to address you.

Ten days ago, the clock struck midnight and we all wished those around us a happy new year. Some might have decided that, to have a happy new year, they would need to make changes to the way they live, and so resolutions were made. However, 10 days on, how many of those resolutions have been kept and how many are already broken? How many of us chose not to make any resolutions this year because we know that they become unrealistic once we are out of the holiday season and the stresses of our everyday lives are back with us again?

During the Christmas season, churches around the world lit candles, which symbolise hope, peace, joy and love as we wait for the Christ light to return to us once more and as we wait for the Christ child to be born in us. On Christmas day, we lit the centre candle—the Christ light—as we rejoiced in our saviour’s birth. That candle will remain with our churches throughout the year as a reminder of the hope, peace, joy and love that we long for.

This year, most churches are reading through the gospel of Matthew. Matthew shows us a Jesus who looked to those in the margins, and who challenges us to give food to the hungry, water to the thirsty and clothes to the naked; to welcome the stranger; to take care of the sick; and to visit those in prison, because we can see Christ in the faces of those people. In other words, we are challenged to spread hope, peace, joy and love to one another in our communities and in our world.

This year, have we already packed the hope, peace, joy and love away with the Christmas decorations, only to be remembered when we unpack them all again next year, or are they like forgotten bought presents still at the back of a cupboard waiting to be wrapped and gifted? Can we find our own Christ light, whatever that might mean to you, to keep burning throughout the year to remind us to bring hope, peace, joy and love into the lives of those who are marginalised, those who are sick and those who hunger and thirst for a better life and to help us with our own resolutions to bring a happy new year for ourselves and to everyone around us?

Business Motion

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-07455, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to today’s business.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees to the following revisions to the programme of business for Tuesday 10 January 2023—

after

followed by

Topical Questions (if selected)

insert

followed by

Ministerial Statement: NHS Winter Pressures

delete

5.00 pm Decision Time

and insert

6.00 pm Decision Time—[

George Adam

].

The Presiding Officer

I call Sandesh Gulhane to speak to and move amendment S6M-07455.2.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Today, we saw the worst-ever eight and 12-hour waits in accident and emergency. In the week ending 18 December 2022, we saw the worst-ever four-hour waits. The average number of beds occupied per day due to delayed discharges is also at a record high.

Almost every indicator of NHS Scotland’s performance has worsened—some to their worst-ever level. Hundreds of thousands of Scots are waiting for treatment. This is a national emergency. People are dying unnecessarily. National health service staff are burning out because they are going above and beyond, but they cannot cope. The crisis in our NHS should be the priority for the Parliament because it is a priority for the people.

In the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care’s own words, this was always going to be the “hardest winter” that the NHS has ever seen. However, with the rhetoric came no action. I have been warning of how bad this winter is going to get, yet there was no prioritisation by the Government to allocate time for a proper debate in the Parliament prior to the recess. Today, a ministerial statement on the NHS is being slotted into the parliamentary business timetable at short notice, with not enough time allocated and not enough opportunity for members’ scrutiny. The decision to slot the statement in came at very short notice.

What has the Scottish Government given priority to in the midst of the NHS crisis? The first Scottish parliamentary debate of 2023 is not about our treasured NHS but about Scottish independence. That is a disgrace. It is not the priority of the people of Scotland and not a good use of parliamentary time. I have therefore lodged an amendment to scrap that divisive debate and extend the time that has been allocated to the ministerial statement on NHS winter pressures by 40 minutes to allow members to raise their concerns and those of their constituents and hold the cabinet secretary to account on his failing NHS recovery plan. We will also support and welcome a full debate as Labour’s amendment requests.

Those who vote against the amendments are voting to prioritise independence over Scottish people dying unnecessarily. [

Interruption

.] Presiding Officer, the Scottish National Party does not seem to care. What we hear there is the SNP not caring.

I move amendment S6M-07455.2, to leave out from “5.00 pm” to end and insert:

“followed by

Scottish Government Debate: People’s Right to Choose - Respecting Scotland’s Democratic Mandate”.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Today, the number of patients waiting more than 12 hours in emergency departments has hit its highest ever level. The head of the doctors’ union said at the weekend that Scotland’s hospitals are “not safe” for patients. In a few weeks, nurses will be forced to walk out of hospitals because the Scottish Government is more interested in clapping them than paying them. We are in the middle of a full-blown crisis that is threatening patients’ safety and putting people into unbearable circumstances.

When the people of Scotland look to the Parliament this afternoon for a response, what will they see? They will see another debate on a referendum, another exercise in internal party management and another excursion into creative avoidance from the real problems that Scotland faces. The Parliament should reflect people’s priorities not just those of the governing parties.

I welcome the fact that the Government has agreed to make a statement on the NHS, but there should also be a full debate on the NHS crisis. We lodged a business motion to hold an NHS debate before Christmas instead of the SNP’s proposed debate on its general election strategy, and we will do so again today.

I move amendment S6M-07455.1, after

“NHS Winter Pressures”, to delete

“

followed by

Scottish Government Debate: People’s Right to Choose - Respecting Scotland’s Democratic Mandate”

and insert

“

followed by

Scottish Government Debate: A New NHS Recovery Plan”.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

I wish everyone in the chamber a happy new year.

With that said, I have to move on to what Mr Gulhane has said and say that I will take no lectures from a member of the Conservative Party about who is caring and who is not when he represents a political party that has proved not to care about the people of Scotland over the years. When the Opposition asked for the Government to make a statement on health at the end of last year, I said that I would bring that back to the Parliament, and I have made sure that it is the first thing that we discuss, because the NHS and will continue to be a priority of this Government.

However, I am only too happy to talk about the benefits of independence. As I said before recess, I will never apologise for encouraging this Parliament to debate the right of the people of Scotland to choose their own future. Indeed, it is somewhat ironic that the Tories are seeking to deny us a democratic debate that will highlight how the current constitutional settlement denies democracy in Scotland.

Frankly, the case for the people of Scotland to be given the choice of and chance for a better future is becoming stronger every day. I remind you of what I said at the end of last year. We are living in a country, led by the Conservatives in Westminster, with inflation running at 10 per cent and household incomes predicted to fall to 2014 levels. The economy is in recession and people face the horrific choice between heating and eating this winter. Millions face eye-watering increases in household costs in 2023 and Brexit is, of course, compounding all of that by creating labour shortages and trade barriers, higher business costs and lost tax income.

It is no wonder that the Tories do not want this Parliament to debate and agree that this is the time for the people of Scotland to choose independence and a future so that we have the opportunity—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

—to create and make our own decisions, allowing this Parliament to be able to provide that better future for Scotland.

I am more surprised by Labour seeking to obstruct the debate. We have worked well over the past three or four months and I would have thought that Labour would have been interested in debating Anas Sarwar’s six pledges for reform in Holyrood, which include the view—which I share—that the Scottish people are sovereign and have the right to determine the form of Government best suited to our needs.

In my opinion, Britain is broken beyond repair and it is now time for the people of Scotland to decide their future.

The Presiding Officer

The first question is, that amendment S6M-07455.2, in the name of Sandesh Gulhane, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-07455, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to today’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members

No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division. There will be a brief suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.

14:12 Meeting suspended.

14:17 On resuming—

The first question is, that amendment S6M-07455.2, in the name of Sandesh Gulhane, be agreed to. Members should cast their votes now.

Before I close the vote, I call Kaukab Stewart to cast a proxy vote on behalf of Stuart McMillan.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Stuart McMillan would vote no.

The Presiding Officer

The clerks will ensure that that is recorded.

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division is: For 30, Against 94, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

The next question is, that amendment S6M-07455.1, in the name of Neil Bibby, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-07455, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to today’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members

No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division.

Before I close the vote, I call Kaukab Stewart to cast a proxy vote on behalf of Stuart McMillan.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

On behalf of Stuart McMillan, I vote no.

The Presiding Officer

The clerks will ensure that that is recorded.

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division is: For 55, Against 69, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

The next question is, that motion S6M-07455, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to today’s business, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members

No.

The Presiding Officer

There will be a division.

Before I close the vote, I call Kaukab Stewart to cast a proxy vote on behalf of Stuart McMillan.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

On behalf of Stuart McMillan, I vote no.

The Presiding Officer

The clerks will ensure that that is recorded.

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

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I was not able to connect to the digital voting platform. I would have voted yes.

The Presiding Officer

We will ensure that that is recorded.

The Presiding Officer

The result of the division is: For 99, Against 25, Abstentions 0.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees to the following revisions to the programme of business for Tuesday 10 January 2023—

after

followed by

Topical Questions (if selected)

insert

followed by

Ministerial Statement: NHS Winter Pressures

delete

5.00 pm Decision Time

and insert

6.00 pm Decision Time—[

George Adam.

]

Topical Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is topical question time.

Hypothermia (Ambulance Call-outs)

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that, during freezing temperatures in December, ambulances were called out to 800 people with hypothermia. (S6T-01077)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

We share concerns that the vulnerable, especially older people, will struggle to keep warm this winter. We are committed to doing everything that we can, in our power, to address the energy cost crisis, which is why we announced in our budget statement on 15 December last year that we will be allocating a further £20 million to the fuel insecurity fund to ensure that it can continue to provide support to those in the greatest need in 2023-24.

That follows on from our decision, as part of the emergency budget review in November, to double our fund to £20 million for the current financial year. Those additional moneys have been distributed to our three current fuel insecurity fund delivery partners so that the immediate crisis support reaches those on the ground without delay.

The United Kingdom Government’s current energy price cap of £2,500 per annum, on average—due to rise to £3,000 from next April—still leaves energy costs at an unsustainable level for far too many households. I would encourage anybody still struggling with their energy bills to contact Home Energy Scotland, which will be able to help with energy advice.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I am sure that the Government understands that there are people in this country who have been switching off their heating almost entirely throughout the winter so far, due to fear that they simply cannot afford it. It is clear that the Tories are the architects of this dreadful cost of living crisis. The sooner that they are replaced with a UK Labour Government, the better.

It is important, though, to focus on what we can do in this Parliament. I am aware of the fuel insecurity fund, which was increased to deal with the challenges faced by our most vulnerable. However, will the Government review the fund and assess whether the money that is available for families and older people in our communities is actually getting to them—we have heard from constituents that that may not be happening in good time—and whether it is close to enough, when the lowest temperatures since 2010 have been recorded in parts of Scotland?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Carol Mochan is

absolutely right. The Conservatives are the architects of the cost crisis that is affecting so many people. The cost crisis is a public health crisis—[

Interruption

.] I am not sure why we are hearing groans from the Conservative benches, when they are responsible for the public health crisis that so many households face due to more than a decade of austerity.

My colleague Shona Robison, who is sat here to my left, is working hard in relation to the fuel insecurity fund and other funds that are available. Carol Mochan will know that we are making progress in relation to the winter heating payment and the pension-age winter heating payment. If eligibility criteria can be expanded, this Government will always keep an open mind, so that we can help as many families as possible.

I am sure that Carol Mochan will agree that, instead of mitigating the constant austerity and cost of living crisis enabled by the Conservative Government, it would be far better if we had the power in our hands to take the necessary measures to save families from the impacts of the cost crisis.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I reiterate my agreement that the Tories at Westminster have created this cost of living crisis. My point would be that they will pay for that at the ballot box next year, which will help to address the crisis.

Following yesterday’s briefing from the First Minister and the cabinet secretary, it is clear—if it was not already—that the Scottish National Party has lost control of the health service. Record numbers of people are waiting more than 12 hours at accident emergency and, crucially, nurses and social care workers are feeling the strain of poor pay and underfunding of services. Patients are suffering as a consequence.

Our national health service is our proudest possession. Staff and patients are concerned. How can the cabinet secretary be confident in the slightest that, when the temperatures drop again to dangerously low levels, vulnerable individuals suffering from hypothermia will even be able to receive treatment and attention as quickly as they need it?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

O

ur NHS is our most prized and valuable asset, and I pay tribute to every single health and social care worker who is providing exceptional care in these most challenging of times. I will say more in the ministerial statement that is due straight after topical question time.

I disagree with Carol Mochan that we are not investing in our health service. We are. Front-line health spending is higher here in Scotland than in other parts of the UK—a record £19 billion for 2023-24. We have record staffing levels. We also care about our staff, whom we value. That is why I say to Carol Mochan that, because of our meaningful dialogue, Scotland is the only part of the UK not to have had nurses or ambulance drivers on strike, which is very different to the situation in Labour-run Wales.

The Presiding Officer

There is much interest in this afternoon’s business. As ever, having concise questions and responses will enable more members’ voices to be heard.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Concerns have been raised that a cold winter, coupled with the Tory-created energy crisis, will mean that large numbers of people will experience hypothermia or other serious issues linked to low body temperature. [

Interruption

.]

Does the cabinet secretary have concerns that unless the Tory Government takes real action to put money back in people’s pockets, such as by matching the Scottish child payment and properly supporting people on low. incomes every winter, we will only see the number of people who experience hypothermia grow as more of them face the choice between heating and eating?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Presiding Officer, I am astonished that in response to Emma Harper’s reasonable and rational question we are hearing complete denial from members on the Conservative benches about the real harm that they are causing people up and down this country through their complete mismanagement of the economy. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

They are responsible for the cost crisis and they should hang their heads in shame.

I could not agree more with Emma Harper, and I share her concerns. A series of UK Government welfare reforms has eroded the real-terms value of reserved benefits. I am deeply concerned about the UK Government’s welfare policies as the rising costs of essentials are far harder for people on the lowest incomes to afford.

We have repeatedly called for additional funding to increase social security benefits to support low-income households this winter, including a £25 per week uplift to universal credit and means-tested legacy benefits, as well as an end to the benefit cap and the two-child limit.

Teacher Strikes

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to mitigate the impact of recent teacher strikes on children’s education. (S6T-01078)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The best way of mitigating that impact is to avoid industrial action. Strikes in our schools are in the interests of no one—least of all pupils, parents and carers who have already faced significant disruption over the past three years.

I remain absolutely committed to working closely with our union and local government partners to try to reach a deal on teachers’ pay, which must be fair and affordable for all concerned. I am in regular dialogue with the unions and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and spoke to them as recently as Friday 6 January.

As Mr Kerr will be aware, the provision of education in Scotland is the responsibility of local authorities

. However, I have previously made clear that wherever strikes occur local authorities should undertake individual school risk assessments based on the availability of staff, with schools remaining open or remote learning facilities being provided wherever possible.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am not sure that I heard a single answer in that long statement from the cabinet secretary. Neither am I sure that I heard anything that will bring comfort to Scotland’s parents, carers or, indeed, the most important people: the pupils, especially those in the senior phase who are preparing for their important exams.

The cabinet secretary is right that the obvious mitigation is to end the dispute, but the dispute was going on before last April. She has said in the media—

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

You have made no suggestions to the Government to offer to help to end the strike.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

You are the Government.

The Presiding Officer

Excuse me, Mr Kerr.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

You might be a shabby Government, but you are the Government.

The Presiding Officer

Excuse me, Mr Kerr. Sit down, please.

I advise all members that I am chairing the session. I would be grateful if we could hear the member when he is speaking.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The cabinet secretary has said in the media that there is room for negotiation and scope for settlement. What is in scope? When will the strikes end? Was the cabinet secretary in the negotiating room yesterday?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The meeting that was held yesterday

was a meeting of the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers, which Government ministers do not attend, but Government officials were there. As I have said, I was in the room with representatives of the trade unions and COSLA on Friday.

There have been a number of constructive talks recently, particularly those held on Friday and Monday, for which I thank trade union and COSLA colleagues. If Mr Kerr will forgive me, I will not go into the detail of those meetings. That is not just a decision of the Scottish Government; trade union colleagues would not thank me if I went into the details of private negotiations. That is not the way to settle the detailed agreement that we will need to come to.

Of course, we are considering all options to resolve the dispute, looking at scope for compromise. However, as I have stated to trade union colleagues on several occasions, the Scottish Government has a fixed budget that is already allocated for this year and it has been eroded by inflation—no thanks to the UK Government for that. We will work to do everything that we can to resolve the dispute but it is fair to say that negotiations will have to continue, as some distance remains between us.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Scotland’s parents, carers and pupils will be astonished—why on earth was the cabinet secretary not even in the room? How on earth can there be a negotiation or a resolution if the cabinet secretary does not even negotiate? That is typical. Teachers are on strike for the first time in 40 years because the SNP Government has repeatedly let them down. The teachers do not want to strike; she is letting teachers and pupils down.

I have one more question to ask, so let me see if I can get a specific answer. Will the cabinet secretary set out one practical idea that she and her Government have to help pupils to catch up and avoid falling further behind?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I gave some of the details of that in my first answer. There are many areas where, because of the impact of Covid, we have remote learning initiatives, such as e-Sgoil, that are assisted by national agencies, although the responsibility for remote learning also lies—quite rightly—with the schools.

On the day when UK Government ministers are standing up in Westminster and bringing in anti-trade union legislation, I will take no lectures from Mr Kerr or any other Conservative member of this Parliament who says that we should be doing more to settle disputes. We know what happens when the Tories are in power—we can see that at Westminster. Compare that to what we have done here in Scotland, where we are having constructive discussions. That is how we solve disputes.

Mr Kerr’s questions today show a lack of understanding of how the SNCT works and of negotiations and dispute resolution. I will take no lessons from him because of that and in particular because of the anti-trade union legislation once again being taken through Westminster by the Conservatives.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I thank the cabinet secretary for her update. Strikes are in no one’s best interest, but industrial action is an essential part of a fair and just society and economy, which has deep roots in Scotland’s industrial history. Does the cabinet secretary share my incredulousness at the brass neck of the Tories who, as she has stated, are trying to pass new anti-trade union laws? The SNP will have no truck with such laws.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Kaukab Stewart sets out the real concerns that we should all have about some of the legislation being proposed by the UK Government in relation to trade unions. I have enormous respect for the important role of trade unions in our society. I commend the role of the teaching unions, the professional associations and the strength of feeling of their members. I am exceptionally careful to listen to that and take that on board.

Once again, Kaukab Stewart is quite right to point out the brass neck of the Scottish Conservatives’ bringing such a question to Parliament on a day when the Conservatives are introducing anti-trade union legislation at Westminster.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The most recent pay offer was sent to the teaching unions at the last minute—quite literally—yet that offer had sat on the cabinet secretary’s desk for 3.5 weeks. That was seven weeks ago. With schools closed across the country, and many more days of strikes to come, when will the cabinet secretary sanction a new offer?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I go back to the point that I have already made: the Government has a fixed budget that is already allocated and that has been eroded by inflation.

Although it is easy for Mr Marra to stand up and suggest that the Government should come up with a new offer, he needs to understand the implications of that and the fact that the money would have to be found from elsewhere in the education budget. When people demand that the Government simply “sort it” by putting a new offer on the table, they have to realise the implications of that and take some responsibility for them.

As I have said, constructive talks have been happening over the past few days. I look forward to those continuing over the weeks ahead and to the further discussions that I will have with trade union colleagues and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to see if the dispute can be brought to a resolution as speedily as possible, because this situation is not in the best interests of Scotland’s children and young people.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The cabinet secretary has said that she will take no lessons today, but the trouble is that no pupils in Scotland are getting any lessons today because of a strike that this Government cannot resolve. The education secretary seems to be very chilled out and relaxed—teachers are on strike and pupils are going without an education, but she is incredibly relaxed and is taking no action to resolve the strike. I will follow up on what Michael Marra asked: is the cabinet secretary saying that there will be no new offer to teachers?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

What I have said and will say again is that

constructive talks are on-going. We are open to considering options that will resolve the dispute and are looking at the scope to see where there is compromise. There will have to be compromise not just from the Scottish Government but from all involved in the dispute. We will of course look very carefully to see what can be done, and we will leave no stone unturned to try and do that as quickly as possible. No one wants to see strike action in our schools, and I appreciate that that includes our teachers, but the stark financial reality that the Government is in makes preventing that exceptionally difficult. We will continue to do everything that we can to bring the situation to a speedy resolution with COSLA and trade union colleagues.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes topical questions.

Point of Order

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The First Minister held a press conference yesterday where all the substantive plans that will be addressed in the next item of business were discussed. Given that my amendment to extend the time allowed for the ministerial statement and questions was not agreed to, I ask that we move straight to questions to allow greater scrutiny of the cabinet secretary’s responses and the few details in the statement to be discussed.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I am aware that the First Minister, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and the deputy chief medical officer provided a public media briefing on national health service winter pressures yesterday. There is sufficient additional detail in this afternoon’s statement, and I will allow it to be delivered. I continue to pay close attention to these matters, and of course, I am determined to ensure that the Parliament’s position is respected.

National Health Service (Winter Pressures)

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a statement

by Humza Yousaf, who will give an update on national health service winter pressures. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I wish to update the Parliament on the extraordinary pressures that our national health service faces this winter, and on the measures that the Scottish Government is taking to address them.

Let me begin by stating a simple fact: this is the single most challenging winter that the NHS in Scotland has ever faced. Our NHS and its committed workforce are facing a perfect storm of intense pressures, which is leading to extreme difficulty, disruption and delays across the service.

We suspect that this especially challenging time for the NHS will continue for the coming weeks and, as I have said previously, the full recovery of our NHS will take not weeks or months, but years.

Presiding Officer, I take this opportunity to thank once again our incredible NHS and social care staff for continuing to provide exceptional care in the most difficult of circumstances. Our entire health and social care system faces the continuing impacts of the pandemic—the biggest challenge that our NHS has ever faced in its 74-year existence.

Covid remains a pressure on our health system, with the most recent statistics showing that Covid cases are at their highest level since the summer. In the week ending 1 January, there were more than 1,200 patients in hospital with Covid-19, which is a 15 per cent increase from the week ending on Christmas day, and is double the number of patients from four weeks ago, when there were more than 600 Covid patients in hospital.

Recent flu admissions have been about three times higher than emergency admissions due to Covid, and cases of Strep A and other respiratory viruses have been rising. Challenges around delayed discharge of patients also continue to impact by driving up accident and emergency waiting times.

Overall pressures on the health system are significant. Last week, the latest management information showed that hospital bed occupancy across Scotland was over 95 per cent. Some sense of the intense pressure that is being felt can be also seen in the almost 100,000 calls to NHS 24 over the two four-day breaks of the festive period. That is the highest festive-period demand in over a decade. Traffic in December to the NHS Inform website and the symptom checker was at its highest-ever level, with 12.7 million page views.

The impact on the Scottish Ambulance Service has also been significant. It dealt with more than 16,000 emergency incidents last week. That is 11 per cent more than the average of the previous four weeks.

Although the situation highlights the significant levels of demand that we face, it also profiles the innovative ways in which we are seeking to tackle the issue through providing effective triage and supporting hospitals and social care settings.

However, the challenge is significant. The seasonal pressures come against the backdrop of the United Kingdom Government’s mishandling of both Brexit and the nation’s finances, which have had dire consequences for Scotland’s social care sector in particular.

Although we fully acknowledge the multiple difficulties that we face, the Government is determined to continue taking action to alleviate pressure on our NHS and social care. I am convinced that we should pursue a whole-system approach to tackling the issues and to supporting, through all parts of the Government, the NHS and social care through the coming critical months.

Last Friday, the First Minister chaired a meeting of the Scottish Government resilience room—SGoRR—to determine the next steps in addressing the unprecedented pressures across the NHS. As well as ministers, senior representatives from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the NHS, integration joint boards and the Scottish Ambulance Service attended the meeting. A number of measures that are being taken to alleviate pressures on the system were reviewed. The measures include use of flow navigation centres as part of the redesign of urgent care; the hospital at home service; and Ambulance Service staff providing treatment, where appropriate, to help people to avoid hospital admission. Additional actions will now be rolled out across the health and social care system.

I can today outline a further course of action to unlock additional capacity to alleviate the pressure on the system from delayed discharges. As I have mentioned, delayed discharges and their impacts on patients continue to be a significant issue. The problem has been exacerbated by increases in staff absences due to self-isolation requirements and sickness, and the number of care home places has been impacted by home closures, too.

There is no doubting that high inflation and high energy costs have significantly impacted on a sector that was already facing multiple challenges. I know that teams throughout the country are working exceptionally hard to ensure that people receive the right care in the right setting, but it is a fact that, at present, there are currently more than 1,700 people in hospital who do not need to be there for clinical reasons, and whose interests are not best served by their being there, because care packages that would allow them to be discharged to go home or to a care home are simply not in place.

To that end, and as an additional and exceptional measure, COSLA and the Scottish Government have worked with partners across the care home sector to identify additional interim spaces in care homes in order to provide additional pathways for people to be discharged from hospital in a timely and safe fashion. In order to support health and social care partnerships to secure the extra provision, we are making available funding of £8 million so that beds can be purchased at 25 per cent above the national care home contract rate.

We will work closely with partners across the NHS, health and social care partnerships and local authorities to ensure appropriate use of funds and to ensure that we have evidence of the impact of that funding. That is a time-limited and in extremis measure that is required to help us with the current capacity issues that we face. The additional funding is intended to meet the increased costs of utilising those beds for a short time.

With partners working collaboratively, we have managed to identify that around 300 interim beds are available. They are in addition to the 600 interim beds that are already helping patients in the system.

That support is intended for use as an additional tool that health and social care partnerships can deploy to support them in the current situation and to allow additional flexibility in order to maximise capacity within our hospitals. We will work with partners to utilise every available bed. Such interim beds might not be a family’s first or, indeed, second choice for their relative, but I hope that families agree that this is, in the current circumstances, about making the best possible choice for those who are in our care.

The measure will be in place for only a limited time to directly support our hospitals in dealing with pressures at the front door. It will enable some people to move from an acute setting to a more appropriate community one, in recognition of the risk of prolonged stays in hospital.

In addition, a ministerial advisory group has been established for a number of months to respond to winter pressures. The group, which meets weekly, brings together Cabinet members—including the Deputy First Minister, me and Shona Robison—with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and key stakeholders, including Scottish Care, to advise on pressures in the system and to consider possible actions to mitigate them.

This week, further guidance has been issued to health boards to make it absolutely clear that they can and should take steps to protect critical and life-saving care, if that is judged to be necessary. Boards can, of course, ask the Government for advice as and when it is required.

We believe that local health boards are best placed to judge what reasonable measures should be taken in each board area. Those measures could include opening or procuring additional capacity; moving staff to areas of pressure; increased engagement with the third sector; and, potentially, delivering a different model of care for a short period.

In my role as health secretary, I retain the emergency powers and ability to direct that are set out in the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978. I am well aware that more severe measures, such as a blanket pause on elective procedures or on key diagnostic tests, are not without impact on the health service and on patients, so it is important at this time that we ensure that NHS boards have the ability to respond flexibly to local circumstances and to deploy local solutions. Advice has recently been issued to local leaders that provides clear guidance on the expectations for assessment, discharge practice and care home oversight arrangements.

Record numbers of patients are also being delayed under the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000. Although such patients are clinically ready for discharge, they cannot legally be discharged until a court-appointed guardian is in place. Officials have been working with the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service and the Law Society of Scotland to investigate where improvements can be made to ensure that people are discharged in a timely manner. I have also met the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland and the Equality and Human Rights Commission this winter to discuss matters that affect adults with incapacity.

Some of the measures that I have just announced are intended to help in the short term with the immediate pressures that we face, but we are also putting in place the necessary long-term steps to address social care challenges that we face. We have invested significant additional funding to support social care. In the current financial year, that includes £124 million to enhance care-at-home capacity, £200 million to increase the hourly rate of pay to £10.50, £20 million to support interim care arrangements, and £40 million to enhance multidisciplinary teams. A further £3.6 million has been made available in the 2022-23 budget to support further development of hospital at home services across Scotland.

It is clear that our accident and emergency services are being impacted severely by winter pressures—of course, that situation is not unique to Scotland. Scotland’s A and E services continue to outperform those in other parts of the UK, and have done for the past seven years, but that is cold comfort for those who are waiting far too long for treatment.

Scotland already has record numbers of NHS staff, and we are recruiting more staff as part of our winter plan. However, it is clear that far too many people are waiting far too long for care—whether that is for an ambulance response or for treatment when they attend our A and E departments. We have taken action to improve A and E waits, including plans to recruit 1,000 new NHS staff and to roll out the £50 million urgent and unscheduled care collaborative to help to drive down such waits. Measures include initiatives such as providing the hospital at home service, ensuring that people are directed to the most appropriate urgent care settings and scheduling urgent appointments to avoid long waits in A and E. We have also increased the amount of virtual capacity—for hospital-level care that is provided at home—to the capacity of a large teaching hospital.

We will also bolster workforce capacity within NHS 24. NHS 24 is an incredibly effective service, and because of the expert advice that it offers, the overwhelming majority of those who call NHS 24 do not need onward transfer to already busy A and E departments. This winter, NHS 24 is taking forward the planned recruitment of around 200 new starts before the end of March. As part of that recruitment, the board appointed over 40 whole-time equivalent call operators, call handlers and clinical supervisors in the run-up to Christmas. Although call wait times for NHS 24 were often longer than usual over the festive period, the vast majority of calls that were received were dealt with through the initial contact.

Despite the pressures that I have outlined, we are seeing progress being made in some key areas across the system. For example, excluding NHS Lothian, the latest figures show that, despite continuing pressures, almost 19,500 operations were performed in November 2022. That is almost 21 per cent higher than the number in November 2021, when more than 16,000 operations took place. It also marks the highest proportion—over 91 per cent—of planned operations to have been performed since the start of the pandemic. That is progress in relation to our elective care.

We are offering more support outside hospital settings to assist people who seek help with common winter illnesses. NHS Inform has issued self-help guides to let everybody know when to stay at home and when to seek more care. General practitioners and pharmacies can be also be contacted as a first port of call for non-critical, non-emergency care. I would like to add, as a reminder to all, that people who have symptoms of respiratory infection should try to stay at home and avoid contact with other people. If people need to leave home, we strongly recommend that they wear a face covering.

I understand that the NHS is built on the people who work in it, who have had to work through incredibly challenging circumstances for years. The pressure of almost three years of the pandemic has been relentless. I will always be available to talk to our committed workforce, who provide incredible care to the people of Scotland day in, day out.

I am grateful to the members of Unison, Unite and other trade unions who have accepted the Government’s record pay offer for NHS staff. In fact, the majority of trade unions that are on the Scottish Terms and Conditions Committee—the agenda for change pay negotiating committee—have accepted our pay deal. Although I am naturally disappointed that we have not got agreement from every trade union, I am also grateful for the positive engagement that has taken place with the GMB, the Royal College of Midwives and the Royal College of Nursing. I will continue to pursue meaningful dialogue with all trade unions to try to avert industrial action. We sincerely hope that the additional pressure of industrial action can be avoided at this very challenging time for the health service. For my part, I remain absolutely committed to dialogue and to positively engaging with our trade unions.

As I have outlined, unprecedented challenges continue to have a real impact on the NHS and on people across the country. Although we face an extremely difficult period ahead, I remain confident that, with the combined efforts of our incredible workforce and the determined will of this Government, those challenges will be met—and not only met, but overcome.

Presiding Officer, let me end where I started, by thanking our outstanding health and social care staff for their herculean efforts during these extremely challenging times. We will continue to honour them, not just with warm words but through our deeds, too. I thank you for giving me the ability and time to make this statement. Of course, I am happy to take questions from across the chamber.

The Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that were raised in his statement. I intend to allow 40 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would be grateful if members who wish to ask a question were to press their request-to-speak buttons now.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Under the cabinet secretary’s watch, the Scottish NHS is on its knees. A and E waiting times, cancer waiting times and delayed discharge are all at their worst-ever levels, with no improvement in sight.

While record numbers of patients were waiting more than 12 hours in A and E, where was the health secretary? We heard nothing from Humza Yousaf over the festive period, only for this hastily cobbled-together statement to be given today before another divisive debate on independence—which is timetabled to last longer than this statement on healthcare.

This is a national emergency. People are dying unnecessarily. Our heroic NHS staff are overwhelmed and burning out. Addressing the crisis in our NHS should be a priority for the Parliament, because it is a priority for the people of Scotland, and they will be appalled today.

I simply cannot fathom why the cabinet secretary did not plan for, in his words, the worst-ever winter that our NHS has faced. Cases of Covid, flu and the cold and the number of accidents are all increasing. That was predictable. For months, we have been calling on Humza Yousaf to rethink his failing NHS recovery plan. Just last month, we published a recovery plan of our own, but our warnings fell on deaf ears, and the Scottish people are now paying the price for the complete lack of preparation. The British Medical Association has said that the Scottish Government has run out of ideas.

Over the festive period, I was out seeing patients in different parts of the country. The problems are similar everywhere. Primary care, secondary care and hospitals are overwhelmed. Patients are scared of going to A and E departments. We need to see improvements, and we need to see them urgently.

In relation to the changes that were announced yesterday, when can we expect to see meaningful change in our NHS, such as improvements in A and E waiting times, delayed discharge numbers and cancer treatment waiting times? Can the cabinet secretary confirm the timescales in which he expects to see significant improvements?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank the member for his questions. These issues are being faced by every health service across the UK. Dr Sandesh Gulhane asked where I was over the festive period. I was busy talking to our trade union colleagues. If his party had done the same, it might not have had nurses and ambulance drivers walking out on strike.

On planning, I noticed that the Conservatives published their winter plan in mid-December. That was not particularly helpful or useful, because the winter planning that we undertook took place after the previous winter had passed. When it comes to planning, if Dr Sandesh Gulhane was the oracle that he claims to be and could have predicted every pressure that the NHS is facing, he might have wanted to tell his colleagues down south, because these pressures are being faced not only by every health service in the UK but by many health services across the world.

What are we doing about those pressures? We have taken a number of actions. As well as the actions that I have announced today, I have already announced the recruitment of additional staff. In fact, we recruited staff last winter with recurring funding in order to help with pressures this winter. We have also provided additional funding for the Scottish Ambulance Service. In 2021-22, the service recruited record numbers of ambulance staff. I have already given details of how our winter plan, which is backed by £600 million of funding, is already helping in relation to social care.

Therefore, we have taken action. However, notwithstanding that, I have always been up front and honest in publicly stating that, even with those mitigations in place, this will be the most difficult winter that our NHS has ever faced.

In answer to the final question that Sandesh Gulhane asked, I simply say that I expect to see improvements in the very short term as a result of the action that we are taking. However, equally, let me be up front and honest by saying that, as schools return and as people return to work and mingle, it is possible that there could be a slight increase in the spread of viral infections, so we expect the first few weeks of January to be extremely challenging.

There will continue to be challenges, but, as a result of the action that I have announced in relation to interim care beds and additional staffing for NHS 24, I hope that there will be some improvements in those pressures in the short term.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The health secretary is keen to tell us that the NHS is under unprecedented pressure this winter, and he cites Covid, flu and Strep A. Let me join him in thanking all NHS staff for everything that they are doing, but they would tell us that this crisis is not unprecedented; it was predicted by clinicians. In fact, fewer patients are being seen in A and E departments now than were being seen before the pandemic.

What is unprecedented is that the health secretary was warned about the crisis by clinicians for well over a year but failed to listen and to act on solutions. What is unprecedented is that the Government failed to end delayed discharge, which it promised to do in 2015. Eight years on, it is at record high levels.

Dr Iain Kennedy of the BMA is clear that the current crisis at the front door of A and E is because the back door, to social care, has not been fixed. What is unprecedented is that, because the Government has presided over inadequate workforce planning for the past 15 years, we now have 6,400 nursing vacancies and, in some areas, 14 per cent of consultant posts lie empty.

I therefore want to ask the health secretary about the 1,000 additional staff. How many of them are actually in post and where are they deployed? I also want to ask about the 300 extra beds. I am sure that they will help, but, when the latest data reveals a record high of more than 1,900 people stuck in hospitals, what impact will the measure have?

Will the cabinet secretary give a commitment to removing non-residential care charges and supporting home and family carers? That would directly contribute to helping to end delayed discharge.

Finally, why is the First Minister not here, giving the statement, as she did yesterday? Why has she instead sent along her spare?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I notice that Jackie Baillie is here, asking the questions, rather than Anas Sarwar, the leader of the Scottish Labour Party. I will not personally insult Jackie Baillie, because, at a time of national emergency, the people rightly expect their political leaders to rise above their petty political differences and work together in the national interest.

Let me respond—[

Interruption

.] Jackie Baillie and her colleagues can shout from a sedentary position, but it is important that I answer their questions. On delayed discharge, as I said to Sandesh Gulhane, I expect there to be improvement once we begin to move people from acute sites into the interim beds, which we expect to happen in the short term. Hopefully, as the levels of flu and Covid begin to abate and reduce, we will begin to see an improvement in our health service and in the performance indicators that Jackie Baillie referenced.

We have a very proud record—I am proud of it—on staffing in the NHS over the past 15 years. Staffing in the NHS is at record levels. However, Jackie Baillie is right to mention the high levels of vacancies, which we are keen to fill. That is why, last year, I announced additional funding to recruit nurses from overseas. Last year, we committed to 200 nurses—

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

How many have you recruited?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I hear Jackie Baillie shouting from a sedentary position—I was literally answering her question as she was talking.

We promised to recruit 200 nurses last winter, and we exceeded that. That funding is recurring. For this winter, we have said that, up to April, we will recruit an additional 750 nurses. I believe that there have been 126 firm offers and that 455 are in the pipeline—that is what boards expect to fulfil. That is all the way up to April. I will give a further update as we get towards the end of this financial year, and I will continue to push boards to go further in their recruitment, where possible.

On Jackie Baillie’s suggestion about non-residential charges, we have a promise—a programme for government commitment—to abolish non-residential charges. I will continue to work in my portfolio to do that at the earliest possible opportunity.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

My question to the cabinet secretary relates to the number of people who are suffering from flu and Covid, not just in our hospitals but in our communities. What action can the Government take to increase the take-up of the Covid booster and flu vaccines?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Gillian Martin is absolutely right to focus on vaccination. We know that Covid vaccination, in particular, is a complete game changer and that the flu vaccine can be effective as well. In Scotland, we have decided to co-administer the Covid and flu vaccines. The uptake has been positive, but I encourage all those who are eligible and who have not come forward to do so. The statistics and data that we have show that uptake levels among health and social care workers are not as high as I would like them to be. I ask front-line health and social care workers who have not had the Covid or flu vaccine please to come forward, because that will help to protect them and, I hope, those to whom they give such exceptional care.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

I put on the record our thanks to the UK Government for the Covid vaccination programme.

Over the Christmas break, I was inundated with correspondence about the crisis in our Scottish NHS. The latest statistics seem to reflect a situation that is now spiralling out of control. Last week, just two in five patients were seen within four hours at the Royal infirmary of Edinburgh, despite weekly attendance being lower than it was in the same week in 2019, before the pandemic.

Let me put the current situation in the words of Dr David Caesar, a senior emergency medicine consultant at the Royal infirmary. Dr Caesar said that

“Dignity feels like a distant luxury”

and that the fatigue among clinicians is “bone deep”, with staff dejected and in total despair. In his answer, perhaps the cabinet secretary could speak to Dr Caesar, not to me. What is the one practical thing that the cabinet secretary will do today that will help Dr Caesar and his colleagues tomorrow?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank Sue Webber for the question. I know Dr Dave Caesar—he used to be one of my deputy chief medical officers in the Government, and I am grateful for the work that he has done. I read his piece, which I think was in

The Times

. I read the public comments that he made.

Before I answer Sue Webber’s question directly, I confirm that she is right and that attendances were lower. However, what that masks, as any clinician on the front line will tell you, is the fact that people are presenting with higher acuity: they are presenting sicker, and therefore their length of stay is longer. That is the challenge that we are currently facing, as well as the exit block—the lack of capacity within already very busy hospital sites.

What can we do to help the likes of Dr Dave Caesar and every other health and social care worker who is doing an exceptional job? We can reduce that workload pressure, which is why there is the additional funding for the 300 interim beds that we have identified and will look to utilise as quickly as possible. We hope that that will begin to reduce that workload pressure. We can continue to make sure that Dr David Caesar and NHS staff are properly rewarded. That is why we put forward a record pay rise for agenda for change staff. We will do what we can to retain our doctors and other staff, making sure that they are appropriately rewarded and remunerated.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I welcome the fact that the Scottish Government’s resilience room has been reconvened, given the level of pressure that our NHS and care services are facing. I am pleased that I played a wee part in suggesting that.

The First Minister’s briefing yesterday, just like the briefings during Covid, was incredibly useful and helpful. Will the Scottish Government continue to keep Parliament and the public regularly updated on the work that is being undertaken to help to address the pressures on our health and care services?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes, I am happy to. I am happy to do media briefings. The First Minister and I will reflect on whether to do another media briefing, and, of course, I am happy at any point to come to the chamber to answer questions on this issue and keep Parliament updated.

It is important that we have the ability to speak directly to the public. That public health messaging is incredibly important. The member may have seen that, throughout the festive period, I was reiterating some of that health messaging, as was the First Minister and the likes of the national clinical director, Jason Leitch. All of us have a role to play in communicating with not just our constituents but the public more widely.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

In relation to the additional beds that have been announced, unpaid carers have raised concerns about the potential for loved ones to be “parked”—their word—in care homes, perhaps against their wishes, as they wait for care assessments. There are serious concerns for people’s wellbeing. How will the cabinet secretary increase capacity to ensure that people are appropriately assessed and not abandoned in a setting that may be inappropriate and unwelcomed, particularly with reports this week that social workers in Scotland missed more than 30,000 work days due to mental ill health? Does he accept that it all comes back to retaining and recruiting more social care staff by valuing them and ensuring that they are offered more than this Government’s insulting rise of 40p?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank Paul O’Kane for the important questions that he asked. I may disagree with some of the characterisation of the situation—I will come to that in a second—but they are incredibly important questions.

Those are difficult conversations to have, but, of course, our clinicians, who have those conversations day in and day out, do so compassionately, but also collaboratively with families.

However, I was being up front in my statement that an interim placement may not be a family’s first or second choice.

Equally, when someone is clinically safe to be discharged, remaining in a hospital that might be at 95 per cent, 99 per cent or above 100 per cent capacity cannot be good for the individual who is involved, let alone for the hospital. Clinicians always try to work with families to ensure that the most suitable care placement is available for them. It might be the case for some of those placements that people are placed, the assessment takes place in the interim care placement and they are either moved on to a permanent care home place or get the package of care that they require for home. When someone is clinically safe to be discharged, being in hospital is not the best choice for them. We know that prolonged stays in hospital for people who are clinically safe for discharge is not good for those patients.

Paul O’Kane and I rehearsed the social care staff question at committee this morning. Our 2023-24 budget has an uplift to £10.90 per hour. That is the third pay rise in the time that I have been Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care—from 2020-21—and it represents an increase of more than £2,000 a year for someone who is on a full-time wage. I say to Paul O’Kane—I will correct this if I am wrong—that £10.90, or the real living wage, is the same wage that is being offered by Labour in Wales, where it is in charge of the health service.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

A recent report by the Nuffield Trust has warned that Britain’s departure from the European Union has worsened recruitment shortages, made accessing essential medicines more difficult and further exacerbated health inequalities. Does the cabinet secretary share my concerns that the economic hit of a hard Tory Brexit is fuelling the severe challenges that the NHS in Scotland is facing?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

There is just no doubt about it. If you talk to any social care provider, they will tell you the damage that Brexit has caused. Social care has been hit by a number of difficult challenges over the years; a hard Tory Brexit is certainly one of them, and the pandemic is another. The most recent concern of social care providers, whether they are care home providers or care at home providers, is the high cost of inflation, which is a direct result of the UK Government’s mismanagement of the economy. That has led to care home energy costs being exceptionally high, and high fuel costs are a problem for care at home providers as well.

I am in constant dialogue with the care sector in Scotland, and I have regular conversations with other health ministers across the four nations. I will continue to implore the UK Government to do what it can in relation to migration, because there is more that can be done in relation to overseas recruitment to help our social care and NHS staff, and to see what more it can do in relation to mitigation of high energy and inflation costs.

The Presiding Officer

There is much interest in this item of business, so I would be grateful for concise questions and responses.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

It is now more than a year since I first asked the cabinet secretary to instruct an urgent Government inquiry into avoidable deaths caused by the crisis in emergency care. We now understand the quantum of that, with the Royal College of Emergency Medicine telling us over the Christmas period that, as a result of the crisis in emergency care, as many as 40 people a week might be dying who did not need to die. I ask the cabinet secretary again whether he will now instruct an urgent Government inquiry into avoidable deaths.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I am not disputing—I do not think that any of us would—the Royal College of Emergency Medicine’s underlying premise that, if patients are waiting excessively long periods for care, they will come to harm. However, each death would have to be individually examined to understand the true scale of that. Although I will not instruct a public inquiry into every single death that might have happened as a result of long waits, I will take time to consider what Alex Cole-Hamilton has said, so that we can understand the true picture of those who have come to harm due to excessively long waits.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Can the cabinet secretary confirm that all financial resources are allocated in the current year, which means that, in order to put any more resources into part of the NHS or the NHS as a whole, there would have to be a balancing cut elsewhere?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes. I do not know whether I made this clear in my statement, but the £8 million that we are putting towards the 300 interim care beds is coming from the health and social care portfolio. Every penny is allocated—it is not additional finance coming from central finance—so we have to find the money from the health and social care budget, which, as John Mason and other members know, is extremely challenging, given the current financial circumstances.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Delayed discharge predates the pandemic, severe workforce pressures predate the pandemic and long A and E waits predate the pandemic. The minister has been being warned about those problems for years and he has chosen to ignore those warnings. Now that the First Minister is doing his job, should he not do the decent thing and resign?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Again, I will not rise to pathetic and petty personal attacks. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I ask Craig Hoy: is that it? When our country is facing a national emergency and the NHS is facing one of the biggest challenges that it has ever faced during its 74-year existence, is the best that Craig Hoy can come up with a quip that he practised in the mirror before coming down to the chamber? The Government is focused, and I am focused, on taking action, whether that be through the recruitment of additional staff, the recruitment of additional ambulance staff, or through putting in £600 million to help the NHS to cope with the winter pressures. As I say, I will allow Craig Hoy to do his flimsy and pathetic party politicking while the Government’s relentless focus will be on supporting the NHS, the people who receive care, and the wonderful workforce that give that exceptional care.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

In the past few weeks, my inbox—like that of any other member—

has been full of messages from constituents concerned about long waiting times at A and E, primarily at Monklands hospital in my area, with some reporting waits of up to 10 hours. I have also been contacted by many local NHS staff who have been working around the clock, and I offer them my heartfelt thanks.

I welcome today’s statement from the cabinet secretary. In light of the circumstances and the pressures faced by Monklands A and E, how can the additional support that he has outlined help NHS Lanarkshire avoid those pressures?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank Fulton MacGregor for his very important question. He is right to say that NHS Lanarkshire is one of the health boards that is facing that pressure most acutely, and as he might imagine, I have been to many sites in Lanarkshire and have spoken to the new chief executive, who has been in place since December, about those pressures. I am personally interacting quite closely with NHS Lanarkshire.

During my most recent visit to NHS Lanarkshire, I visited the A and E department at Wishaw, and it was clear to me that delayed discharge was causing some significant issues. I talked to one patient who had been waiting for far too long for treatment at A and E precisely because there was no bed available. A portion of the 300 interim beds will be in North and South Lanarkshire.

I commend Lanarkshire for its very good collaborative pan-Lanarkshire way of working. When I speak to the chief officers and chief executives of North and South Lanarkshire Councils, and the health boards, it is clear that good collaborative work is being done on the ground, and I encourage Lanarkshire to continue with that.

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

We should make no mistake: this is a humanitarian emergency. It is costing lives and damaging the wellbeing of NHS and social care workers. NHS Lanarkshire has just been mentioned. That is the crisis within the crisis. The code black nightmare that began in 2021 continues today in 2023, so constituents in Lanarkshire want to know when that will end.

I have two short questions for now, one of which is again about Lanarkshire. We need more doctors for out of hours and across primary care. Can the cabinet secretary update me on that?

As well as the immediate action that we need to take, we need long-term solutions, so will he agree, with the BMA and others, to facilitate a national conversation on the future and survival of the NHS?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Working out of hours is one of the key areas that the new chief executive of NHS Lanarkshire and I spoke about when we last met. The member might have seen from NHS Lanarkshire that GP practices in Lanarkshire will be open on additional days during the weekends. I welcome that.

There are standing directions to every single health board to work with their GP practices to see what more can be done around extending opening hours. I am grateful to the GPs and staff within their multidisciplinary teams who are working those additional hours, whether it be in the evenings or at weekends, to help practices to cope with some of the demand that they are facing.

Regarding Monica Lennon’s second question, I gave an indication during media interviews at the weekend that I am open to the idea of a national conversation with the public about the health service. I think that Monica Lennon and most—if not all—members of this Parliament would agree that that conversation must be grounded in the founding principles of the NHS. The idea of a national conversation is a good one: let us ensure that we do it in such a way and at such a time that it does not add pressure and work to a system that is already facing significant pressure. I am happy to keep Monica Lennon updated about those conversations.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

What actions are being taken to ensure that health boards retain the ability to respond to local circumstances to alleviate some of the unique pressures that they currently face?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I hope that I gave an indication of that in my statement. There have been calls for the Government to declare a national major incident, but I think that it is right for health boards to retain decision-making at local level so that they can determine how best to flex their services in order to cope with the demand that they are facing. I will continue giving that flexibility to local health boards. At a national level I, the NHS chief executive, Caroline Lamb, and the chief operating officer, John Burns, will always remain close to our NHS boards to offer advice and support, where that is appropriate.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of my keen interest in staff welfare. A lack of time away from wards is cited as the biggest barrier to staff accessing breaks. If they are to be able to have those breaks, we need more staff, and Brexit has undoubtedly affected staffing. I welcome everything that the cabinet secretary has said so far about recruitment. Further to his answer to Rona Mackay‘s question, what conversations has the cabinet secretary had with the Home Office and UK Government ministers about fast-track visas for those coming to work in the Scottish NHS? If those conversations have not yet taken place, will he ask for a meeting as a matter of urgency?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I have previously raised that subject with the UK Government. In fairness, that subject has been raised not only by me but by the Welsh health secretary, too. I know that she is very supportive of continuing those discussions to try to get the UK Government to see sense about the current prohibitive and restrictive immigration rules. I genuinely do not understand those. I know that many NHS trusts in England face the same challenges that we do, in social care as well as in the NHS. Gillian Mackay makes a good suggestion. I will ask for the issue of immigration, and immigration rules in particular, to be back on the agenda at the next four nations meeting.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Given the additional pressure that Covid and seasonal flu are responsible for in both the primary and acute care sectors, can the cabinet secretary confirm whether medical opinion indicates that it would be a valuable step to extend eligibility for the vaccination booster programme—which is currently for adults aged 50 years and over—to include adults who are under 50?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Kaukab Stewart asks a good question. Eligibility for the Covid vaccination booster programme or for any future vaccination programme is always informed by advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. We have not previously departed in any significant way from JCVI advice. We will continue our discussions with the JCVI, but it is important to take its informed and expert advice and then to come to a decision based on circumstances at the time.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

One in 10 patients who arrived at hospitals by ambulance in the final week of December waited for more than three hours to be offloaded into A and E departments. I have a constituent who called 999 and waited for 12 and half hours for an ambulance crew to arrive. What steps is the cabinet secretary taking to ensure that ambulances can be back on the road as soon as possible? What steps is he taking to ensure that call handlers have the training that they need and are able to prioritise calls as they come in?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Sharon Dowey asks an important question. She is right to say that ambulance turnaround times at far too many acute sites have been far too long. I think that she has a particular interest in the Ayr and Crosshouse hospitals. At those two sites in particular, turnaround times have been far too long.

We are working closely with Ayrshire and Arran NHS Board to try to improve the situation, as she would expect us to do. However, she is well aware that the entire system is connected. That is why I said in my statement that we are taking a whole-system approach.

If we can create some capacity by safely discharging 300 people in the system who it is clinically safe to discharge and get them out of busy acute sites, that will help with the flow in our hospitals and allow ambulances to convey patients to the acute sites much more quickly and get back out on to the road. That shortens the response times.

I agree that the type of response times that Ms Dowey referred to are not the standard of care that we expect. The measures that I announced today will directly help with those turnaround times. We are also working with the sites and health boards, such as NHS Ayrshire and Arran, where turnaround times are far too high to see whether other conveyancing areas can be created. We accept that there is limited capacity in acute sites, but we are examining whether any additional space can be found to convey patients and allow ambulances to turn around quickly and get back out on to the road.

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

I was contacted by a constituent regarding a recent call to NHS 24 that went unanswered and was cut off after a two-hour wait. I am sure that the cabinet secretary agrees that that should not happen. In such circumstances, patients are likely to attend A and E, which might not always be required and puts additional pressures on the service.

As a result of recent increased demand on NHS 24, what provisions are being put in place for future surge capacity to adequately handle calls to ensure that people can make use of the service instead of accessing other parts of the NHS, including hospitals?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank Bob Doris for an important question. I went to meet and speak to staff at NHS 24 on Christmas eve, so I was there at one of the moments when pressure was at its highest. In fact, if memory serves me right, I went at 10 o’clock in the morning and 900 people were already waiting for their calls to be answered.

I hope that Bob Doris understands and appreciates—I think that he does—the exceptional pressure over the festive period. I referred to the almost 100,000 calls that NHS 24 received over the two four-day weekends in the holiday period. That is a demonstration of the high level of demand.

NHS 24 expected high levels of demand and increased its staff between October and December but, even with those additional staff in place, there were still challenges for some people in getting through. That is why I referred to the 200 additional staff at NHS 24. That recruitment will help with call-answering times.

I also say to Bob Doris and anybody who is listening that the NHS 24 app is available. It is a minimal viable product. It has self-help guides on it and information about, for example, the local general practice and local pharmacy. We will keep building on that app so that it becomes a full digital offer in the weeks, months and years to come. I also point people towards NHS Inform.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

Constituents in Lothian region have struggled to get through to a call handler on NHS 24, which is causing distress and anxiety to those who are ill and do not know where to turn. As a result, they might be more likely to attend A and E unnecessarily to get medical attention, thereby increasing pressure on NHS services that are already at breaking point this winter.

Will the cabinet secretary advise what support will be given to constituents who are desperately trying to get help from NHS 24 before the recruitment of new starts is completed by March? More than 100 trained staff are being let go from the Covid national contact centre. Could those workers be reassigned to assist?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank Foysol Choudhury for his question and suggestion. As we have begun to reduce the numbers working in the national contact centre, we have looked to deploy as many as we can back into the health service and some into social care.

The recruitment of the 200 additional staff at NHS 24 that I mentioned began in October to help with the festive period. We will continue to recruit. That will help Mr Choudhury’s constituents who are struggling to get through to NHS 24. I have seen the latest data, which show a reduction in the amount of time that people are waiting for their calls to be answered. I hope that that is a positive sign of things to come.

As well as NHS 24, we have the app that I have mentioned; NHS Inform, which has a symptom checker that has been checked millions of times over the past few months; the pharmacy first service; and GPs. There are many avenues that someone can go to before going to A and E, and I would encourage everybody to make sure that they get the right care in the right place at the right time.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Bob Doris and Foysol Choudhury have raised the really important issue of the time that it takes people to get through to someone on NHS 24. I have had examples of people waiting two hours or more to get an answer on the phone, which leads to additional problems.

Of course, people still have other problems in trying to access GP services, for exactly the same reasons. Despite making call after call, day after day, to get an appointment, they are unable to do so, which builds up problems for the future. What specific action will the Government take to increase the availability of GP appointments, in order to avoid unwarranted and unnecessary presentations at A and E?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

That is a really important question. Murdo Fraser raises an important issue. It is worth saying—I think that Murdo Fraser would agree with this—that our GPs and GP staff are doing an incredible job in really difficult circumstances, and the workload pressure that is on them is unprecedented.

At the same time, I recognise the situation that Murdo Fraser articulates. Many members across the chamber, from all the political parties that are represented, have written to me over the past weeks and months to tell me that they have constituents who have struggled to get GP appointments. That is why I announced several measures, the first of which is funding for telephony services. Where GP practices can improve their telephony services to help with access issues, we have provided some funding.

I have also written to every GP practice to say that my expectation is that every GP practice should offer pre-bookable appointments, because we still have the situation in far too many GP practices whereby people have to phone up at 8 in the morning. They might not get through—they might be 25th in the queue and then hang up. As a result, people end up at A and E, as Murdo Fraser said. Pre-bookable appointments could help with that.

The last thing that I will say on the issue is that I have instructed a GP access group to be set up, which will have on it not just GPs, but a patient representative, to unblock any of the GP access issues that currently exist. I am in regular dialogue with the British Medical Association—I suspect that Murdo Fraser will know Dr Andrew Buist fairly well—about what more we can do to work together collaboratively to improve access to GP practices.

I will end my answer to the question where I started, by saying that I understand just how hard our GPs and GP practice staff are working under unprecedented pressure.

The Presiding Officer

The next question is from Paul McLennan.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on the measures—

The Presiding Officer

Sorry, Mr McLennan. I am taking a point of order from Stephen Kerr.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Presiding Officer, I am mindful of the fact that you allocated 40 minutes for questions. We are now at 39 minutes, and I am sure that a number of colleagues still want to ask questions, including Conservative members.

Would you be minded, on the precedent of last year’s statement on services at Dr Gray’s hospital, under rule 8.14.3 of standing orders, to extend business until all colleagues who have issues to raise with the cabinet secretary have had the opportunity to do so?

The Presiding Officer

Although I am not minded to accept such a motion, I am determined that members who have pressed their request-to-speak buttons will have their questions taken.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on the progress that has been made on the measures that were previously put in place to recruit additional staff from outwith Scotland?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Before I answer that question, I say that I am happy to stay in the chamber for as long as necessary to answer these important questions.

On recruitment from outwith Scotland, I have referenced in some of my answers the efforts on international recruitment. We made efforts to recruit nurses from overseas last winter and provided recurring funding to help this winter. We exceeded our target of 200 nurses and have provided further funding. As the member probably knows, in October I announced around £8 million to support the recruitment of up to 750 nurses, midwives and allied health professionals. As I referenced in my answer to Jackie Baillie, around 126 firm offers have been accepted, and we expect there to be many more in the pipeline as we move towards April.

We are also continuing to encourage GPs from across the rest of the UK, in particular, to see Scotland as a destination for them. Scotland—particularly in the case of our remote, rural and island communities—is a very attractive place to work. We have a proactive campaign under way to see if we can attract GPs from the rest of the UK to work here.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

At quarter past 3, I received a text from my GP surgery, saying that it will be providing only emergency appointments. That is similar to the texts that I have been receiving since 13 June when I have tried to access my GP surgery. We are in a real crisis.

I have said many times in this place that the Scottish Government is taking an unsustainable trajectory in healthcare in Scotland and is managing the decline of our health service. Covid has just accelerated that decline.

Is it not about time that the long-term sustainability of the Scottish national health service was mapped out and we looked at the preventative health agenda and tackled Scotland’s poor health record? We are still the unhealthiest nation in Europe. Should we not be looking to prevent the need to seek healthcare in the first place or, at the very least, treating patients at an earlier stage, before they become acute and require more intensive care? Surely that is a significant way to reduce the pressure on our health service.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I agree with everything that Brian Whittle said in relation to the importance of the preventative agenda. I spoke at length about that at this morning’s meeting of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. Our 2023-24 budget continues that focus and our approach of putting investment and funding towards the preventative agenda.

Mr Whittle is right that there can be a temptation—which we will, of course, avoid—when dealing with an unprecedented emergency situation, to lose focus on the preventative agenda. We will not do that. We will continue to focus on smoking cessation, our work on alcohol and drugs treatment, and our work in relation to obesity and healthy and active lifestyles. I know that the latter is very important to Mr Whittle, and I give him a firm commitment that we will continue our focus on the preventative agenda, while also dealing with the unprecedented pressures that we face.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that allied health professionals have unique skills that help with discharge from hospital. They are essential in making that happen and returning people home safely, which undoubtedly helps with pressures on acute beds. AHP services are currently under pressure, with vacancies across the country. What discussions has the Government had to ensure that the increase in bed capacity also gives patients access to that essential group of staff?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I could not agree more with Carol Mochan about the importance of AHPs. A multidisciplinary approach needs to be taken to provide people with holistic healthcare. That is why we have recruited more than 3,220 members of those multidisciplinary teams, many of whom are working in general practice up and down the country. We are investing in AHPs in our hospitals, for example in our frailty teams, to help to reduce the length of time before people—particularly elderly people who have had a fall—come into hospital. We will continue to work with all the relevant bodies in relation to AHPs, and I place on record my thanks for the incredible work that they do, and the holistic care that they provide up and down the country.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Why did Scottish health boards have to wait for days for this slothful Scottish National Party Government to send a letter to allow them to move staff around to deal with the crisis when, on Friday, Humza Yousaf knew that Borders general hospital was cancelling routine operations for my constituents? I would like to know from the health secretary: why the delay?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Rachael Hamilton’s question betrays her ignorance of the health service and how the health service works. There has never been a blockage on local health boards being able to take local decisions. In fact, she has just given the example of how a local health board took a decision to meet local demand. That was happening up and down the country long before I was health secretary—it has happened for many years.

It is a founding principle of our national health service that local health boards have the ability to locally flex the care that they provide. What I did in my letter was simply ensure that there was further guidance, particularly in emergency-type situations, should health boards require it. As Rachael Hamilton referenced in her question, that is already being done. I am very grateful to local health boards for taking really difficult decisions in a time of great emergency.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

The villages and communities of Port William and Whithorn in Wigtownshire have been without adequate GP coverage for many months. With the closest A and E department being an hour’s drive away and there currently being four-hour waits on the NHS 24 helpline, there is massive pressure on the community pharmacy, which is going above and beyond to look after the health concerns of local people. The pharmacist in Whithorn is looking at an average of 83 pharmacy first visits per week, of which 28 come under the pharmacy first plus service. That is over and above the normal day job. Over the past few weeks, the position has been dramatically worse. That number of visits is far more than an average pharmacy would see in the course of a month.

This is undeniably a crisis that is putting people’s lives at risk. Will the cabinet secretary consider intervening and, as a matter of urgency, deploying GPs to those two rural communities, which are undeniably experiencing the greatest pressure, the greatest need and the greatest risk?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I have regular conversations with our health boards, including NHS Dumfries and Galloway, NHS Borders and NHS Grampian, where we tend to see pretty significant pressures in relation to general practice and community pharmacies. I will continue having such conversations. On the back of Finlay Carson’s question, I will also ask the chief medical officer and the chief pharmaceutical officer to see what more can be done, particularly on general practice cover in the areas that he has referenced.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I am interested in patients’ rights with regard to the proposed interim beds in care homes. Can patients refuse to go to such beds if they want to go home but there is no care package to enable them to do so? Will they be parked for weeks in such beds, or is the cabinet secretary confident that he can move people on quickly? Can he guarantee that they will not be required to pay care home fees if they are self-funders?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Those are important questions. The choice guidelines are still in place—we have not suspended them—and clinicians are mindful of them. As I mentioned in a previous answer, they have conversations on such issues day in, day out. We will not be forcing people out. As I said in my comments, which I hope that Willie Rennie will take in the spirit in which they were intended, an interim place might not be someone’s first or even second choice. However, when it would be clinically safe for a patient to be clinically discharged, it would not be best for them to be in a hospital that is overoccupied and facing the pressures that currently exist if they can be in an interim place in a better environment. To answer Willie Rennie’s question directly, the choice guidelines are still in place and have not been suspended.

I do not like the suggestion that anyone would be “parked”; that will not happen. I think that Willie Rennie will agree that whether a patient is in an interim or a permanent care home place, people who work in social care provide exceptional support, so such a patient’s care needs will be attended to in the best way possible.

We are looking for that to be a short-term, interim measure, which should last for weeks and not months. We do not want people to be on interim placements for months and months; at most, we want them to be there for weeks. Whether they are in Fife or any other part of the country, I have every confidence that chief officers, who are excellent at their jobs, will do a phenomenal job in getting people the permanent care packages that they require.

On Mr Rennie’s final question, there will be no cost to individuals in relation to interim care placements.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The cabinet secretary will be well aware of why I might be concerned about the situation in Forth Valley royal hospital, in the context of the measures that have been taken to reinforce the management and work practices at NHS Forth Valley.

With that in mind, and not having had sight of or a chance to read the cabinet secretary’s statement in advance, I have listened carefully to find out whether it mentioned that something would happen, right here and now, that would meet the need that has been identified by the chair of BMA Scotland, who said:

“The NHS is haemorrhaging crucial staff—staff who we urgently need now more than ever before—and the government must step up to stop it. They can talk as much as they want about recruitment of staff, of investment in the system or of plans for improvement, but every single one will fall flat on its face unless there is a laser like focus on keeping the staff we have.”

Will the cabinet secretary please underline the one thing that will happen now that will reinforce the retention of those very valuable NHS workers?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I can give Mr Kerr more than one thing that will be done in just a second.

I am more than happy to have conversations with interested members about Forth Valley royal hospital. Mr Kerr will know that the improvement plan is in place and that I have committed to coming back to the Parliament with an update on how the plan is being enacted—I will do that.

One of the actions that we are taking that doctors have asked for is the reintroduction of a recycling of employer contributions—REC—scheme. We have given that ability to health boards and that scheme went live in many health boards up and down the country from the end of last year. That will help with retention and was a direct ask from the BMA. The other ask relates to pension issues. There has been some movement from the UK Government, but the BMA says that it is not enough, so we will continue to lobby the UK Government on that.

We will also pay our workforce. It is really important that we pay the members of our workforce adequately and fairly. We will continue to engage with them. The Scottish Government has put a record pay deal on offer for our agenda for change staff. We will continue to work with and listen to our medical workforce, especially junior doctors, who, understandably, are feeling particularly aggrieved, given the pressure that they are under and the pay differentials that exist between them and senior medical staff. We will continue to engage on pay. Of course, that will help with retention, too.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes the ministerial statement on NHS winter pressures.

Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Michael Matheson on Scotland’s national energy strategy and just transition plan. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I am pleased to inform Parliament that today, the Scottish Government is publishing its draft energy strategy and just transition plan. The draft strategy maps out the future of our energy sector and sets out an ambitious suite of actions for the Scottish Government, along with actions for industry, the regulator and the UK Government, to realise that bright future over the next decade.

We are at a pivotal point in Scotland’s transition to net zero and the strategy charts a clear course for the transformation of the energy sector—one of Scotland’s most important industries—to 2030 and beyond. That transition must be achieved in a way that delivers for the people of Scotland to enable us to embrace the opportunities of a green economy.

This is a time of unprecedented uncertainty in global and national energy markets. High energy prices are impacting people, communities and businesses across Scotland. Those uncertainties bring even more impetus to the need to deliver a decarbonised, affordable and secure energy system.

Scotland already has an enviable track-record in renewables. The success of the ScotWind leasing round—the world’s largest floating offshore leasing round—and our long-standing commitment to onshore wind, are strong foundations on which to grow our renewables capabilities even further. Wind power is one of the lowest cost forms of electricity and the Scottish Government is clear that that is where we should focus to reduce costs in the long term and address our vulnerability to future energy cost crises.

The strategy builds on that success with three overarching objectives. The first is to significantly scale up renewable energy production, helping to secure a just transition away from fossil fuels. As part of the transition, overall energy demand will also reduce.

The second objective is to secure continued and increasing investment in the net zero energy economy. The delivery of the strategy will mean more jobs, a growing supply chain, new manufacturing capabilities, new skills, new export opportunities and thriving communities.

The third objective is to deliver a fairer and more secure energy system that is no longer reliant on volatile international commodity markets and delivers lower costs for consumers. That requires stronger and more targeted action from the United Kingdom Government to reform the energy market in a way that is fair, and to create the right conditions for the investment needed in infrastructure to support the expansion of renewables.

The draft strategy sets out the significant opportunities for Scotland in transforming our energy system. Scotland already has 13.4GW of renewable electricity generation capacity. It is our ambition to deliver at least 20GW of additional low-cost renewable electricity capacity by 2030, which could generate the equivalent of around 50 per cent of Scotland’s current total energy demand.

Scotland’s rich renewables resource means that we can not only generate enough cheap green electricity to power Scotland’s economy, but also generate a surplus and open up new economic opportunities for export. However, we must make those changes to our energy system in a way that is just. The transition must maximise economic benefits, ensure a fair distribution of opportunities and risks, and do so through a process that is inclusive. The oil and gas industry has played an important role in our economy and been part of our national identity for decades. However, our previous policy position of maximum economic recovery is no longer appropriate.

The strategy explores the challenges of moving away from oil and gas and the ability of low-carbon and net zero energy generation to not just replace, but build on the employment opportunities that people, particularly in the north-east, have come to rely on. In the strategy are the first results of the independent research that was announced in 2021 and scrutinised by a panel of experts on the future role of North Sea oil and gas in Scotland’s energy system and economy.

That work shows that as an increasingly mature basin, production in the North Sea is expected to be around a third of 1999 levels by 2035 and less than 3 per cent of the 1999 peak by 2050. That projection takes account of the remaining potential development in the North Sea and is without any political decision to reduce consumption due to the climate emergency. That means that domestic production will effectively end within the next 20 years if we do nothing. The draft strategy is consulting on whether we should act faster than that.

Whatever people’s position on the pace at which we move away from fossil fuels, a failure to act now to deliver a just transformation of our energy system would be to neglect our energy security and the future of our economy, and risk the kind of damage to industrial communities that we saw in the 1980s. However, if we seize the opportunity that is presented by the transition, the number of low-carbon jobs in the energy production sector is estimated to rise from 19,000 in 2019 to 77,000 by 2050, delivering a net gain in jobs across the energy production sector overall.

The strategy shows how we can build a positive route through the transition, boost employment in energy generation, and provide energy security. That is why today’s publication is not just a draft energy strategy; it is also the first draft just transition plan.

We recognise that the transition must take account of different geographies, industries and infrastructure across the country. The draft energy strategy and just transition plan will be further developed through engagement with trade unions, businesses and communities. We are pleased to have supported the Scottish Trades Union Congress to ensure that workers have the opportunity to participate.

Our £500 million just transition fund is supporting Moray and the north-east to become centres of excellence for the transition. Projects such as the deployment of a new digital offshore energy skills passport to support the transition of skills and jobs across the rapidly changing industry are already under way. That work is led by OPITO. I hope that, as we move forward, the UK Government, which has, of course, benefited from oil and gas revenues for so long, will make a matching contribution.

The draft strategy sets out our key ambitions for renewables deployment and brings together clear policy positions and a route map to realise those ambitions. We have made proposals for key sectors. We propose increasing onshore wind from 8.78GW as of June 2022 to over 20GW by 2030. That would more than double our existing capacity. We propose increasing offshore wind from 1.9GW, as of June 2022, through a pipeline of 3.8GW already consented, to between 8GW and 11GW by 2030. The results of the ScotWind leasing round reflect market ambitions in excess of current planning assumptions.

The strategy consults on what a future ambition should be for solar, building on our current 411MW of capacity. Tidal stream also has potential. We are also consulting on an ambition for tidal and wave energy.

We recognise the huge potential of pumped hydro storage power to play a significant role in our future energy system. The lack of an appropriate market mechanism from the UK Government is frustrating the realisation of that opportunity for significant economic investment, job creation, and gigawatts of clean energy. Coire Glas, for example, represents more than £1 billion of investment, with up to 1.5GW of capacity and 30 gigawatt hours of storage. The UK Government must take action to ensure that that potential is realised.

We will work with communities, energy companies and parts of the public sector, such as Forestry and Land Scotland and Scottish Water, that already generate renewables to expand community ownership. We also want to hear views on those ambitions from unions, wider industry and communities.

The draft strategy reaffirms the Government’s position that we do not want or need new nuclear power. We are clear that the focus must be on developing flexible and renewable technologies rather than new nuclear fission plants, which are expensive and take decades to deliver. Although we do not have the power to influence offshore oil and gas exploration and extraction, we are seeking views on a more robust climate compatibility checkpoint, including for oil and gas fields that are already licensed but are not developed, and on a presumption of no new exploration in the North Sea.

The strategy reaffirms our commitment to, and the importance of, carbon capture, utilisation and storage to Scotland’s energy transition. We continue to engage with the UK Government to encourage it to make swift decisions to support the Acorn project in the north-east, which is critical to not just Scotland’s transition but that of the wider UK.

The Acorn project is connected to the development of a hydrogen economy, but it is clear that the most significant potential in hydrogen comes from the creation of green hydrogen from surplus renewable energy. As we set out in the “Hydrogen Action Plan”, which was published in December, we will rapidly grow Scotland’s hydrogen economy to deliver a renewable and low-carbon hydrogen production ambition of 5GW by 2030 and 25GW by 2045.

To put that in context, 5GW could produce energy that is equivalent to about a sixth of Scotland’s total energy demand. Much of that hydrogen could be generated from our offshore wind sector, with the potential to create a new energy export industry for Scotland. In the coming months, we will develop sector export plans on renewables and hydrogen to set out how energy can continue to be a critical export growth sector as we transition to net zero.

The strategy sets out how we will meet the challenges of reducing demand so that Scotland’s main energy-using sectors—heat in buildings, transport, industry and agriculture—use energy more efficiently and become largely decarbonised by 2030. That transition requires significant investment that goes beyond what a Government with limited borrowing powers can deliver. We will scale up activity to move from a funding policy model to a financing one. That will effectively leverage private sector investment and action to better amplify the impact of public investment.

The strategy gives investors certainty that Scotland is a place that supports renewable energy whole-heartedly. Our vision is that, by 2045, Scotland will have a climate-friendly energy system that delivers affordable, resilient and clean energy supplies for Scotland’s households, communities and businesses.

The Scottish Government cannot deliver that vision alone. Industry must accelerate investment in key sectors and infrastructure and must continue to build capacity in the Scottish supply chain and the skills of the energy workforce. The UK Government must act on energy security, network investment and market reform, which are its responsibility, as is much of the groundwork that is required for a thriving hydrogen economy.

To deliver on the timescales that are set out, the UK Government must embrace the needs with pragmatism. A copy of the strategy has been forwarded to the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, and I will be inviting the UK Government to join us as part of an energy transition delivery group to deliver the plan.

Achieving the vision for Scotland will be a national endeavour and will require a collective effort at local and national levels across Government, industry and our communities. The consultation on the draft document opens today, and I look forward to hearing views from people across Scotland on critical aspects of our future net zero energy transition.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that were raised in his statement. I intend to allow about 30 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his much-delayed energy strategy. This represents a far from happy new year for the tens of thousands of workers who are engaged in the oil and gas sector. Those workers often feel as if they are an afterthought for the Government, and that impression will not improve after today.

While the cabinet secretary trumpets a rise in low-carbon jobs from 19,000 in 2019 to 77,000 in 2050—a target that is so far off that even the Scottish National Party might hit it—members of the Government have been parroting at least one made-up figure about wind power capacity for years, when they have known full well that it lacked any evidential basis. What evidence will the cabinet secretary provide to reassure workers that his numbers are correct this time? When will such jobs become available?

Let us not forget that a survey showed that just one in 10 oil and gas workers feel capable of switching to renewables. The statement’s warm words said nothing about college places or retraining grants and incentives and—bizarrely—there has again been ignorance of the £16 billion North Sea transition deal. What proportion of the oil and gas workforce does the cabinet secretary believe can switch?

Finally, the cabinet secretary talks of domestic production ending and a presumption against new exploration and production. Does he worry that such an approach risks shutting down the industry prematurely, leaving us dependent on imports and undermining the very supply chain that we need to deliver the transition?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The member has raised a number of points, and I will try to deal with them in turn.

Let me first turn to the suggestion that in some way we are neglecting the important role that the north-east has played in our energy sector over the years. It is the Scottish Government that is investing half a billion pounds in Moray and the north-east of Scotland through the transition fund to help support that transition—a level of investment that, to date, the member’s colleagues at Westminster have failed to step up and offer. That is the type of investment that will support the transition.

The Westminster Government has repeatedly taken the tax revenue from oil and gas but not invested the money back into the north-east of Scotland and the rest of our economy. What we cannot afford to happen this time around, with renewable energy, is to allow that same trick to be played on the people of Scotland. We need to ensure that the investments that are made in our renewables sector deliver economic benefits here in Scotland.

A very practical example that the member might want to think about when it comes to skills and the people in the oil and gas industry who want to transition into the renewables sector, as well as those who want to stay in the oil and gas sector, is investment in carbon capture, utilisation and storage. That technology allows those who work in the industry to remain in the industry, and those who want to move into the industry to do so. The only reason why that has not happened already is that the UK Government has refused to back the Acorn project.

When it comes to making these decisions, and making sure that we deliver for the future needs of our economy and the energy sector in Scotland, there is one party that we will never take any lectures from. That is the Conservative Party, because of its failure over decades in supporting the energy sector in Scotland.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

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

The long-awaited publication of the draft energy strategy and just transition plan comes at a time when we are facing a cost of living crisis and a climate crisis. The need for a just transition to a low-carbon, affordable energy process has never been more important. However, many of the so-called plans that have been published today are a rehash of existing policies that the Climate Change Committee has said are simply not enough. There is little new that will change the Government’s failure to ensure that our transition is a just one.

In 2010, the Scottish National Party promised that there would be 130,000 jobs in renewables per year by 2020. We would be the Saudi Arabia of renewables, it said. The reality behind the rhetoric is that just a fifth of that number of jobs has been delivered, and supply chain contract after supply chain contract continues to go overseas. Therefore, few people will believe the cabinet secretary’s commitments today.

However, it is not just the jobs that the Government is offshoring: 90 per cent of the energy from the recent ScotWind leasing round will come through overseas-owned multinationals, which are offshoring the billions in profits.

At a time when Labour in Wales has committed to creating a Welsh publicly owned energy firm, and the next UK Labour Government is committed to a UK publicly owned energy firm, why is there no commitment from the Scottish Government in this strategy to a publicly owned energy firm, to keep bills down and to keep the profits here in Scotland?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Let me deal first with the point that Mr Smyth is making about the skills in the energy sector, which is extremely important. As we move forward, it is important that we no longer look at the energy sector as being just an oil and gas sector. We need to look at it in a much more holistic fashion, to include oil and gas, renewables and hydrogen. All of those areas play an important part, and it is important as we go forward that we have the right type of skilled workforce in place to support that.

One of the ways in which we will do that is through the green skills strategy, which we have committed to publishing this year. It will set out in detail the measures that will be taken to help to support the transition within the energy sector and green skills. I am sure that the member will be aware of the recent report by PwC that highlighted that Scotland is the part of the UK with the highest green jobs growth—it is where the fastest level of growth is being seen in green jobs. We want to build on and capitalise on that moving forward.

Let me deal with the member’s final point about a public energy company. He will be aware that we considered the possibility of setting up a public energy company in the retail sector, but the present market simply does not allow for that. I am sure that the member will recognise that, for many decades while the Labour Party was in government in Westminster, it failed to put in place any fund to secure some revenue from the North Sea, which could have been invested for future use. It took exactly the same approach that the Westminster Tory Government has taken. For decades, Westminster Governments have quite literally siphoned off the taxes from our oil and gas sector, so we have no benefit to show from them. [

Interruption

.]

The difference that we see with ScotWind and overseas public energy companies is that the Scandinavian companies have oil and gas—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Excuse me, cabinet secretary. Could we have less sedentary chit chat, please?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Scandinavian Governments have had the wisdom to set up funds and companies to invest in such areas. Those countries also have the benefit of being independent, which allows them to free up the finance to make that scale of investment. That is exactly why Scotland should be independent. Not only would we get the revenue benefits from our overall renewable energy sector, we could invest in public infrastructure in our energy sector and have a public energy company that invests in the same way as companies in Norway, Denmark and Sweden have been able to do for decades. Both Labour and the Tories have failed to deliver such a system for decades.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The people of Scotland have a clear world advantage in terms of access to natural resources such as wind, water and wave. The energy strategy sets out clear targets and ambitions, and it provides the certainty that developers need to invest in development and skills. However, does the cabinet secretary agree that the strategy cannot just enable the exploitation of our resources by international companies for energy transmission elsewhere? It must ensure that Scotland realises the benefits from access to clean, green, cheaper energy, from the economic activity and from energy and manufacturing jobs here in Scotland. What are the biggest risks to the strategy delivering for the people of Scotland?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

One of the most important elements of our energy transition is ensuring that the transition is fair and just. We must ensure that Scotland does not simply become a production basin for electricity and hydrogen for domestic and export purposes while not getting any of the economic benefits of that here in Scotland. Even with our limited powers, it is important that we get the supply chain benefits that go alongside such developments.

We saw the impact of the UK Government’s withdrawal of subsidies for onshore wind, which resulted in a rapid contraction of the supply chain in Scotland and the UK as a whole. As a result, Scandinavian countries stole a march on us in developing that technology and manufacturing capability. We cannot make that error again.

The strategy sets out a clear pathway to ensure that we maximise not only the potential from our renewable energy base for domestic and export purposes but the economic benefits here in Scotland. Those benefits should come from not only the production value but the manufacturing of the technology that supports that production. If we develop and manufacture that technology here, we can export it to other parts of the world. If we do that, we will be able to deliver a just transition, which is exactly what the strategy aims to do.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I ask for more succinct answers, because I am keen to call all members who have requested to ask a question.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I know that the Scottish ministers find wind power statistics hard to understand, but here is a fact that should give them pause for thought. On 14 December last year, only 3.4 per cent of energy across the UK was generated by wind turbines. Surely a successful energy strategy needs dependable and flexible sources of power, so why will the Scottish Government not stop discounting the possibility of creating small modular nuclear reactors?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

We could take any particular day and look at the contribution that wind makes to our wider energy mix in the UK. I do not know whether the member has looked at what wind is contributing to the UK grid today in terms of output, but it is in the region of 40 per cent of what the UK grid is using at the moment. However, that will change by the hour and at different times, which is why we set out in the strategy the importance of having an energy mix that involves

not only onshore and offshore wind but tidal, marine, hydro and pumped storage. We want to ensure that we have a mix that gives us flexibility. I am sure that the member will be aware of the developments that are coming in battery storage, and the capacity that that will provide to store the energy that is generated by renewables.

The member referred to small modular reactors. The reality is that SMRs are at phase 1 in the technology development process and probably at least another six, seven or eight years of a technological process needs to be gone through before we even get to the point at which development could be taken forward. They are 10-plus years away. Given the member’s consideration of the issue, I would have thought that he would be aware of how far off in the distance SMRs are and that he would know that they are not a reliable way for us to plan to meet energy needs in future.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for his statement, which presents fantastic opportunities for us to move to net zero, to improve energy security and to boost our Scottish economy. What workforce analysis was carried out in preparing the strategy? How did we arrive at the figure of 77,000 jobs? How will we monitor that figure for jobs acquired, and how will that be reported?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The figures were drawn from a variety of reports, including one from Robert Gordon University on the potential for development in the renewable and clean energy sector. They are also part of the wider analysis that we have carried out in relation to oil and gas and the transition away from fossil fuels. Reports from Offshore Energy UK and OPITO have also contributed to that. All those reports looked at the potential for the workforce in the green energy sector as we transition. It is extremely important that we maximise the economic and employment opportunities in the energy sector, and that is exactly what the strategy aims to do.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for the advance sight of his statement and of the draft energy strategy and just transition plan, which states:

“We are supporting the reskilling of oil and gas workers by funding an offshore skills passport through our Just Transition Fund.”

Such a passport must be more than just an app that tells the user where their qualification gaps are; it must allow for a seamless transition—a fair and just transition—for offshore workers by avoiding costly duplication of training for them. Failing that, the Scottish Government could look at strengthening licensing and leasing conditions to require energy employers to recognise offshore workers’ prior training and existing qualifications. Will the cabinet secretary commit to working with the energy unions to remove financial barriers to transition for Scotland’s offshore workers?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

That is exactly what the passport will do—it will provide seamless movement between the oil and gas and renewables sectors. I hosted the skills summit up in Aberdeen with the trade unions. The STUC and the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, which were part of that, warmly welcomed the work that is taking place to deliver exactly that approach. They have stated publicly that a big step forward has been made in delivering that type of passport. What the member is looking for is exactly what the passport will deliver, and that is why we are looking to roll it out this year and why the unions are so supportive of it.

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

The draft energy strategy and just transition plan provides a route map of actions that are central to meeting our climate change targets, and the north-east communities will play a significant part in delivery of the plan. Will the cabinet secretary outline how the Scottish Government will ensure that a balance is struck between the need to deliver a just transition and the need to ensure that communities are not only consulted but empowered to make a valid and positive contribution to local delivery and outcomes?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Audrey Nicoll raises a really important point. In focusing on delivering a just transition and the economic opportunities that go alongside the transition to a low-carbon energy system, we need to ensure that we take communities with us, because they will be impacted by the technology that is deployed to deliver that system. That is why, for example, with onshore wind, we have good-practice guidance through which we encourage developers to be much more focused in working with communities to allow them to be party to the process and to look at co-production as part of that process. We have rolled out greater community programmes to allow communities that want to develop their own energy network to do so.

Therefore, it is important that we continue to ensure that those who are developing energy production facilities, particularly onshore, are working in partnership with the local communities that will be affected. The guidance that we will put in place is directed at doing exactly that.

I would like to go further and be able to mandate that developers are required to do that, but I am unable to do so because it is a reserved area. I hope that, at some point, the UK Government will see the wisdom of mandating the need to work with communities and for community benefit to be part of any community programme in the energy sector.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of the statement. I welcome the strategy and, in particular, the acknowledgement of the contribution that tidal and marine energy can make to meeting the ambitions.

The Climate Change Committee highlighted last month that

“Few enabling factors are likely to have a bigger impact on delivering Net Zero ... than the ability to shape”

our

”workforce in time to meet the demands of the transition.”

To be fair, the plan acknowledges that, but there is a mountain to climb to prepare Scotland’s workforce. Given the problems that have arisen in meeting earlier commitments to job creation, can the cabinet secretary confirm that the “Climate Emergency Skills Action Plan 2020-2025”, which is due to be updated later this year, will include a detailed and quantifiable route map to developing the skilled workforce that will be needed to fill the 77,000 green jobs that are expected by 2050?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I particularly welcome Liam McArthur’s comments on tidal and marine energy, which he will obviously have a keen interest in, through his being the local member for the area in which the European Marine Energy Centre is, which is a world-recognised centre for developing that technology.

I agree with Liam McArthur’s point that there should be a very clear pathway for delivering the skills, employment opportunities and jobs that will go alongside the transition. We have embedded the just transition plan within the energy strategy so that we can clearly see how they are interlinked. The green energy strategy and the climate skills strategy that we will bring forward this year will reinforce that and provide much greater detail. I hope that they will give the level of detail that the member is looking for, and that we can demonstrate the clear pathway that we are determined to take in order to maximise the jobs and economic opportunities that come from transitioning our energy system.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

As the cabinet secretary will know, Argyll and Bute is a significant contributor to Scotland’s energy strategy through onshore wind, offshore wind, wave power and pumped storage, and through Islay being one of the carbon neutral islands. Can the cabinet secretary advise how the Scottish Government will ensure that rural and island communities across Argyll and Bute will see the benefits of the strategy?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

It is important that Argyll and Bute benefits. One of the ways in which we can achieve that is through the carbon neutral islands strategy that has been introduced, which includes Islay in the member’s constituency.

Another piece of work that will complement our strategy is the islands energy strategy, which will be published in the coming year and will set out more detail on how we will ensure that the energy and just transition strategy has the right impact on our island communities, including those within Jenny Minto’s constituency.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

A just transition to clean energy requires materials to build the wind turbines, heat pumps, electric cars and other infrastructure that we need. However, we cannot assume that those materials will be readily available. Global demand for resources is rising and we have all seen the shocks to international supply chains. Therefore, can the cabinet secretary confirm what proportion of materials can be sourced through domestic reuse, remanufacturing or recycling and, if not, when an assessment of that will be carried out?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I cannot give Maurice Golden the specific details, but he has raised a really important point. During the past nine or 10 months, because energy security has become such a central focus for European countries, the scale of the ambition to transition away from fossil fuel energy systems has grown significantly, so there will inevitably be constraints on availability of materials within the sector. It is impossible for the sector to scale up at the rate at which countries are now looking to transition away from oil and gas and to deliver renewable energy projects. There is no doubt in my mind that there will be material constraints that will have an impact on roll-out of some technology, so the member’s point is an important one.

Among the key things that will be central to addressing that are our looking at what we can produce locally in our domestic market including from recycling, repowering of some older onshore wind farms and moving early to secure access to materials.

This is an area in which Scotland has an advantage. We can move earlier than other countries that are now turning their minds to onshore and offshore wind. We are already in that space and are taking forward those technologies. We can help to secure greater access to markets and materials by moving early, which is why the strategy sets out a ramping up of our ambition and of the timeframe in which we want to deliver it. That should help to address the type of issue that Maurice Golden has highlighted.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The science of climate change demands that North Sea oil and gas be phased out. That is the right thing to do for people and planet. Today, Scotland’s energy strategy abandons the dogma of maximum economic recovery of oil and gas and sets a path to a renewables future that will leave no workers behind. The UK Government must follow Scotland’s lead. What plans does the cabinet secretary have to engage UK ministers on the strategy? Does he share my concern that, unless they change direction on oil and gas, they will undermine not just our ambitions but the whole Paris agreement?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

There is a section in the strategy that sets out the clear areas of action that the UK Government needs to take forward, and I have provided a copy of the strategy to the UK Government secretary of state who has policy responsibility for the area. We are setting up a task force with the specific role of helping to implement the strategy, and I have invited the UK Government to have a minister join us on the task force in order to address the issues that the UK Government needs to address to drive forward the strategy and deliver on the just transition plan. I hope that the UK Government will work in partnership with us to deliver. We have offered the place on the task force in the spirit of co-operation. It is important that the UK Government is practical and open in recognising its role. I hope that it will take up the offer to join us on the task force in order to drive forward delivery of the strategy and the just transition plan.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the cabinet secretary provide more detail on how the £75 million energy transition fund will support our energy sector and the north-east to make progress on the energy transition as we move towards net zero?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Four projects have already received funding through the energy transition fund, through which we are investing £75 million in the north-east. Those projects are the Global Underwater Hub, the net zero technology transition zone, the Energy Transition Zone and the Aberdeen hydrogen pub—sorry, the Aberdeen hydrogen hub. The Aberdeen hydrogen pub is an idea, but I cannot see the Scottish Government investing in alcohol sales. [

Laughter

.] Those projects are all about protecting existing jobs and promoting creation of new jobs in the north-east. We will look to build on that as we go forward with funds, in the years ahead.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I agree with the cabinet secretary that Scotland has the potential to be a world leader in production and exporting of green hydrogen, which is a market that is growing fast. However, to gain first-mover advantage, Scotland needs to invest now at a level that allows fast development of hydrogen production. Many other countries are ahead of us, including countries in the middle east. It is a fast-expanding market. Will the Scottish Government ensure that public investment in and support for green hydrogen match the opportunity and the Government’s ambition? This cannot be another Scottish Government promise that is not met with action.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I welcome Brian Whittle’s support for green hydrogen. I completely agree that there is huge potential. I think that our green hydrogen market will be driven not by domestic demand but by export opportunities. Scotland is in a unique position in Europe to capitalise on that, which is exactly what we are determined to do. The hydrogen action plan that I published last month sets out the export plan for how we intend to go about that.

In October or November last year, we set out our hydrogen proposition to help to support the manufacturing industry in Scotland, and to attract manufacturing in the hydrogen sector into Scotland. We are already engaging with a range of stakeholders in the industry that have an interest in coming to Scotland. They are particularly interested in Scotland because the gateway to delivery of green hydrogen is renewable energy—offshore and onshore wind—and we are already able to set out not just our plans but our targets. Our leasing rounds have already happened, so those companies can see that it will become a reality and that other countries are behind us in achieving that.

I recognise that some countries in the middle east are more advanced than we in the UK and other parts of the world are because of the level of investment that they are making, but members can be assured of our focus on ensuring that we maximise on the opportunity that is provided by green hydrogen. It could be a major economic boost for Scotland for many decades to come.

One of the other reasons why we are in a strong position in taking forward green hydrogen is our oil and gas sector. The skill sets within that sector can transition very well into the hydrogen sector. Few countries in the world that have set ambitious targets for green hydrogen have the skills base that we have, which can drive the whole sector.

That combination of skills in the oil and gas sector and the build-out of our onshore and offshore renewables gives us a real opportunity to be one of the major players, particularly in Europe, in the delivery of green hydrogen for export purposes. We are determined to capitalise on that and to build a hydrogen economy for future generations, because that could become a major part of our economy in the years ahead.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

I warmly welcome today’s commitment to significantly increasing gigawatt outputs for onshore and offshore wind. Can the cabinet secretary confirm his continued commitment to maximising the potential of solar energy, and can he perhaps touch on some of the reasons why Scotland’s solar ambitions require further consultation at this time?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The strategy sets out our proposition to extend and develop our solar capacity. We have about 411MW of solar power capacity; we want to look at increasing that. However, before we set a target, we want to consult the sector and the industry in order to understand what the most appropriate target would be for the future. I assure the member that the purpose of the strategy is to look at how we can build and expand our solar sector in Scotland. I hope that, after the consultation period, we will be able to set a clear target for how we do that.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I welcome the ambition in the just transition plans to maximise economic benefit and to ensure fair distribution of opportunity in an inclusive way. However, I fear that that is not what is happening in our communities. Taxi operators in Glasgow are fearing for their jobs and livelihoods if plans to introduce the low emission zones go ahead in June. They are facing significant challenges in ensuring that their vehicles are compliant, including in actually finding compliant vehicles, and drivers have said that they might have to give up their jobs.

The impact of not getting this right is significant. Fewer taxis mean that women have fewer safe options for travelling home late at night—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am sorry to interrupt, Ms Duncan-Glancy, but I need a question because we are running out of time.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

—and disabled people could be stuck in their homes. Taxi drivers are really struggling.

The council has written to the Government to ask for additional funding and—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Ask a question, Ms Duncan-Glancy. We are running out of time.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I am moving to my question now, Presiding Officer.

Can the minister update us on whether the Government has received the request for additional funding, and whether it will provide that funding? Will it ask the council to delay the zone until the funding is in place so that Glasgow can keep its cabs on the road and people can continue to rely on them?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I understand the point that the member has raised. That issue is not covered by the energy strategy and the just transition plan but by transport policy. I am more than happy to ask the Minister for Transport to write to the member to say whether we have received that letter and what action we are taking on the basis of the information that is provided within it.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I can squeeze John Mason in, if I get a brief question and a brief answer.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

The cabinet secretary mentioned carbon capture, utilisation and storage in his statement. How are the negotiations with the UK Government going, and is it being any more constructive than its predecessors?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I am sure that all members recognise the critical importance of carbon capture, utilisation and storage, especially the Acorn project, not just to the Scottish energy transition in terms of delivering on our climate change targets, but because of the significant economic benefits that go alongside it.

We remain deeply concerned by the UK Government’s lack of progress on that matter. We have not had any confirmation of the timeline for the track 2 process. At one point, there was an indication that the track 2 process would start before the end of last year, but that has been delayed. We now have no certainty or clarity about the timeframe.

It is absolutely essential that the UK Government does not lose the major economic opportunity that the Acorn project would bring to Scotland. If that is lost, communities from the north-east to Grangemouth will rightly feel bitterly betrayed by the UK Government. We will continue to press the UK Government to ensure that it takes urgent action to address that issue, because it is mission critical for delivery on climate change here in Scotland and across the whole UK. Any further delay will waste money on a project that could be delivered now and could create jobs now. We will continue to press the UK Government to set out a clear timeframe for track 2, so that there is certainty that the Acorn project will be delivered, and swiftly.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the statement on Scotland’s energy strategy and just transition plan. I will allow a very short pause to enable front-bench teams to change position before the next item of business.

Independence Referundum

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-07429, in the name of Angus Robertson, on the people’s right to choose: respecting Scotland’s democratic mandate. Members who wish to speak in the debate should press their request-to-speak buttons. I call the cabinet secretary.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Every member in this chamber is here today because of the trust placed in us by the people of Scotland, through their votes. Those votes have consequences and, thanks to our system of proportional representation, they matter and allow people to express their choices. That is what democracy is about—making people’s choices matter.

There is, of course, more to modern European democracy than just counting votes, but when that fundamental is undermined and people are denied what they have voted for, there is a risk that democracy itself will be undermined.

That places obligations on those of us who win elections. We must do our best to deliver on the mandates that we are given. It also obliges us when we do not win elections—and very few of us are elected at the first time of asking—to respect the decision of the people, acknowledge the result and accept the right of the winner to deliver the commitments that they were elected on. Not to do that, but instead to deny democracy, is a dangerous thing, but it is something that people in Scotland are becoming increasingly accustomed to.

I will focus on the outcome of three votes and on the question of how we who are privileged enough to be elected to Scotland’s national Parliament can best deliver what people in Scotland voted for.

The first of those was Scotland’s overwhelming vote, in June 2016, to stay in the European Union. By a majority in every single council area, 62 per cent of people in Scotland voted to remain part of the European Union. No part of Scotland voted to leave, yet, two years ago, we in Scotland were removed from the European Union against our will. This week, instead of celebrating 50 years of EU membership, of co-operation, multilateralism and solidarity between nations and of economic development and peace, we are stuck counting the cost of the Tories’ reckless Brexit.

The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that, in the long run, Brexit will reduce productivity by 4 per cent compared to what it was during our EU membership. That equates to a cut in Scotland’s public revenues of around £3 billion every year, heaping further massive pressure on our national health service and other public services.

Those statistics are stark and they mask the human reality of the impact of Brexit: the small businesses that are going under because of the price of importing; the restaurants and hotels that are closing rooms and services because they cannot get staff; the firms that are passing on to customers their increased costs, which is helping to fuel record levels of inflation; the academics and scientists who are no longer involved in world-leading research because they are unable to get funding to collaborate with peers in the EU, which is diminishing our ability to innovate and be at the forefront of discoveries and is threatening our world-class standing; the loss of tax revenues that could have been used to fund public services; and the health and social care sectors that are dealing with a staffing crisis while trying to rebuild from a pandemic.

Brexit is harming everyone in Scotland and there are few reasons to be optimistic. Yes, times are tough globally, and every country is suffering from the effects of the pandemic and the global energy crisis. However, decades of mismanagement, compounded by the folly of Brexit, have left the United Kingdom economy utterly unprepared to weather this storm.

European countries that are comparable to Scotland are wealthier—

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I will in a moment.

European countries that are comparable to Scotland are wealthier and have lower income inequality, less poverty, higher social mobility, higher—often significantly higher—productivity, greater research and development spending and higher business investment than the UK has. Perhaps the member from the Conservative benches can explain why.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

On other small independent European nations, perhaps the minister will tell the Parliament how much it costs to see a general practitioner in Ireland and what the prevailing rate of corporation tax is in Ireland.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I note that the member from the Conservative benches could not explain why countries that are comparable to Scotland are so much better off. The Conservatives have flimsy arguments for the retention of the United Kingdom.

It gives me no pleasure—none at all—to point out that the decision of people in Scotland to remain in the EU has been vindicated. Since the Brexit referendum, of course, people in Scotland have voted in every single election for people and parties that are committed to reversing Brexit. In the 2017 and 2019 elections to the Westminster Parliament and in the 2021 Scottish Parliament elections, a majority of MPs and MSPs were elected on mandates to hold an independence referendum so that Scotland could apply to rejoin the EU as an independent member state.

That takes me to the second of the three votes that I want to discuss. An independence referendum was on the ballot paper in May 2021, when this Parliament was elected. Members should not take my word for it; they should believe the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, who said, in the run-up to that election:

“People have to be really clear that a vote for the SNP is a vote for another independence referendum”.

Members should believe the leader of the Scottish Labour Party, who said in 2016:

“Mandates come from the electorate in an election ... it should be the people of Scotland that decide when the next referendum is.”

Members should believe the Scottish National Party and Green manifestos, both of which committed to holding a referendum, in the clearest possible terms, and 72 out of 129 of us here in the Scottish Parliament—a clear majority—were elected to deliver that. The parties that said, “Vote for me and there will be no referendum,” lost, and the parties that said, “Vote for me and we will give you the choice of independence,” won.

That simple act of placing one’s vote next to a candidate or party that pledged in their manifesto an independence referendum is itself an exercise by people in Scotland of their right to choose their constitutional future. That is a right that used to be accepted across the political spectrum. It is a right that the Labour Government in Wales accepts. The Welsh Government said:

“the UK is conceived of as a voluntary association of nations”,

and

“it must be open to any of its parts democratically to choose to withdraw from the Union. If this were not so, a nation could conceivably be bound into the UK against its will, a situation both undemocratic and inconsistent with the idea of a Union based on shared values and interests.”

That right should matter as much to those who oppose independence as those who support it, because what is Scotland within the United Kingdom if we do not have the right to decide to leave? Trapped, stuck—however we vote. Is that the voluntary union that unionists claim?

That brings me to the third vote that I would like to discuss. In 2014, people in Scotland were offered the choice of independence, and they voted against it. We accepted that result, but here is the question that requires an answer. After the referendum, did Scotland get what the majority voted for? People in Scotland were promised that within the United Kingdom, we would benefit from the economic strength of the UK. Instead, we have suffered from years of economic mismanagement, culminating in the disastrous experiment of a failed Tory budget that cost this country billions and put the final nail in the coffin containing the UK’s reputation for economic competence.

The OECD predicts that the UK will be the slowest-growing G20 nation over the next two years apart from the sanctioned Russia.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Perhaps the member on the Conservative benches will explain why the UK is doing so badly on international comparisons.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

On funding choices, does the cabinet secretary think that it is better to fund the Men’s Sheds movement to the tune of £75,000 a year, or fund £1.5 million annually for the work of 25 civil servants to work on an independence prospectus?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Given the opportunity to rise to the challenge and explain why the UK is the worst-performing country in the G20 on international comparisons, the member was unable to do so. It is an embarrassment, and the Conservatives should take responsibility for it.

The latest Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and International Monetary Fund forecasts show that the UK is set to have one of the highest inflation rates among G7 nations in 2023.

People in Scotland were promised that a no vote would secure Scotland’s place in the European Union. Just before the referendum, the then leader of the Scottish Conservatives said in the STV referendum debate:

“It is disingenuous … to say that no means out and yes means in, when actually the opposite is true. No means we stay in, we are members of the European Union.”

Oh really?

The then Secretary of State for Scotland said in November 2013:

“The only guaranteed way of leaving the European Union is to leave the United Kingdom.”

The better together campaign itself asked the question:

“What is the process for removing our EU citizenship?”

Its answer:

“Voting Yes.”

People in Scotland were promised a new era of respect for devolution, and that the United Kingdom would offer us a partnership of equals. Instead, we have seen the Westminster Government use its House of Commons majority to repeatedly overrule the Scottish Parliament, in breach of the Sewel convention. We have seen a series of power grabs through Westminster legislation changing and limiting this Parliament’s powers again and again without our consent, and now we have the UK Secretary of State for Scotland threatening, with a stroke of his pen, to overrule a bill that was overwhelmingly passed in this Parliament.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Cabinet secretary, I must ask you to bring your remarks to a conclusion.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Indeed.

When the will of a huge majority of elected MSPs in Scotland’s Parliament can be reversed by a single figure from the Westminster Government, that shows clearly where sovereignty under the devolution settlement lies. Far from enhancing devolution, giving Scotland more powers and more control, the Westminster Tory Government is undermining and systematically dismantling devolution.

The motion before us says that the decisions of people in Scotland matter; that their votes count and that their future should be in their hands. This is about who decides Scotland’s future. Is it the 59 MPs from Scotland or the 591 from the rest of the UK?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You must conclude and move the motion.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Is it the Scottish Parliament or the Secretary of State for Scotland? Is it a Prime Minister from a party that has not won an election in Scotland since 1955? There is only one answer: the people decide. Democracy demands it.

I move,

That the Parliament acknowledges the decision of the UK Supreme Court in the reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues under paragraph 34 of schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998; reaffirms its belief that people in Scotland have the sovereign right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs; believes that the United Kingdom should be a voluntary association of nations and that it should be open to any of its parts to choose by democratic means to withdraw from the union, and calls on the UK Government to respect the right of people in Scotland to choose their constitutional future.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I will allow a wee bit of latitude for members on the other front benches, should they take interventions—although it is entirely a matter for them whether they do, which is why I allowed a bit of latitude for the cabinet secretary.

I call Donald Cameron to speak to and move amendment S6M-07429.1.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

At the beginning of a new year, there might have been an opportunity for a new approach from the Government, but no. Entirely predictably, the Government has chosen the constitution as the subject of its first debate of 2023.

We have an on-going global cost of living crisis, a bitter and violent war in Europe and total turmoil in our public services in Scotland. The NHS is on its knees, primary schools are closed today and many secondary schools are closed tomorrow, and at the top of the Government’s list of priorities is another independence referendum. What on earth is it thinking? This debate is nothing short of shameful.

If the passion and energy expended today was concentrated instead on health and education, we would be in a much, much better place, not least because, as a matter of law, it is now unequivocally clear that this Parliament does not have the power to legislate for a referendum on Scottish independence. The Supreme Court’s judgment in November was unambiguous. With that in mind, it begs the question why we are here, once again, debating the issue.

It may be that the Scottish National Party needs to give its hard-core supporters some red meat to keep them happy. It may be that the Government has completely run out of new ideas on how to deliver for the people of Scotland. It may be that the only thing that the SNP wants to talk about is the constitution, because it has failed so monumentally elsewhere.

Let us take the NHS as one obvious example. Parliament heard earlier today from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, but only after he received pressure from these benches and others to address the state of the NHS. A statement by a cabinet secretary falls woefully short of the proper and rigorous debate of the issues here in this chamber.

Let me dwell on those failures for a moment, because this is what we should be debating. On Sunday, the deputy chair of the BMA said that patient safety was now “at risk every day” in accident and emergency departments in Scotland, and that the NHS faces an “unprecedented crisis”. On BBC Scotland this morning, Dr Iain Kennedy, the BMA chair, said that

“the NHS in Scotland is broken. Members are telling me that they are exhausted ... burnt out ... considering their futures”.

He went on to say that

“many parts of the NHS”

are

“collapsing, so we have no doubt that the NHS in Scotland in its current form is unsustainable.”

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I am delighted to talk about health. Would Donald Cameron concede that Brexit has been a real problem for the NHS in Scotland, if not the UK? It is one of the reasons why we need the democratic right to decide to go back into the EU as an independent state.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

As Ms Martin knows, the problems in our NHS in Scotland began long before the vote for Brexit in 2016.

“The NHS in Scotland is broken.”

Those are stark words from one of our most senior doctors. That situation has come about despite repeated warnings that a winter crisis was looming.

Doctors and nursing leaders were not impressed by the measures announced yesterday. This is what we should be debating. Let me give one concrete example. We know that, last week, bed occupancy rates in hospitals were more than 95 per cent. That is 10 per cent over the 85 per cent rate that is seen as the maximum figure before patients are put at risk. That kind of occupancy rate is not sustainable for providing the

“safe and effective care that patients need on a daily basis”.

That is what the BMA said, and it is right. If the SNP focused on supporting the NHS and fixing the long-standing problems that exist there, instead of obsessing over independence, perhaps some of those issues could have been addressed.

I make no apology for focusing on these matters, because it is not just the NHS where SNP ministers have lost focus. In education, we know that there are 900 fewer teachers than when the SNP came to power, and that the attainment gap between the least and most deprived is wider than it was five years ago. We know that police numbers in Scotland are at their lowest level since 2008 and that violent crime has risen to its highest level since Nicola Sturgeon became First Minister. We know that, in transport, this SNP Government has presided over the botched nationalisation of Ferguson Marine. The delay of two ferries could result in the cost running to £200 million over budget, with island communities suffering as a result. Failure after failure after failure, and all because this Government has only one real priority.

A Survation poll published on Monday stated that only 8 per cent of people feel that the Scottish Government should prioritise an independence referendum—just 8 per cent.

I turn to the cabinet secretary’s motion. If the SNP were being honest about listening to, and respecting the wishes of the people of Scotland, then it would appreciate that Scotland expressed its view barely eight years ago in the referendum in 2014 that the UK Government agreed to—a referendum that countless SNP members called a “once in a lifetime” referendum. Even the cabinet secretary once called it the “opportunity of a lifetime”. Given that opportunity, the people of Scotland voted decisively to keep Scotland in our United Kingdom and rejected independence. Although Scottish Conservatives and others in the chamber have always respected that outcome, the SNP and the Greens have never done so, which is why the way in which the debate is being framed by the Scottish Government is utterly ludicrous and indeed hypocritical.

The SNP’s and Greens’ obsession with agitating for a referendum that nobody wants is harming our public services. The Government has taken its eye off the ball for too long, and people across Scotland are noticing it. They are seeing the crisis that is unfolding in our NHS; standards falling in education and the attainment gap widening; increasingly poor performances in public transport; and a Government that has its head in the sand when it should be addressing the real and pressing needs of the people of Scotland. It is an abject disgrace.

I move amendment S6M-07429.1, to

leave out from “reaffirms its belief” to end and insert:

“recognises that the people of Scotland voted decisively to remain within the United Kingdom in 2014; agrees that another divisive referendum should not be a priority during the ongoing cost of living crisis, and believes that it should focus its time on addressing the pressing issues that the country faces, including the current issues facing the NHS.”

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Sarah Boyack to speak to and move amendment S6M-

07429.3. You have up to six minutes, Ms Boyack.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

The fact that we are debating this subject is a disappointment, but it is not a surprise, given the priorities of the SNP and Green Government. Let us look at what has happened over the past few weeks. Over the festive period, we had severe weather that caused significant disruption in many parts of Scotland and put massive pressures on our resilience services. In the run-up—[

Interruption

.] If you respect my right to respond to your opening remarks, cabinet secretary, please give me a couple of seconds.

The point that I am making, which is absolutely clear in the Labour amendment, is that this subject is the wrong choice for our first debate this year. We should be focusing on the NHS. In the run-up to new year, doctors in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde pleaded with the health board to declare a major incident, while NHS Grampian issued an appeal for all staff to come in. When the cabinet secretary referred to NHS Lothian earlier this afternoon, he did not acknowledge the long-standing deep issues of underfunding, the lack of capacity that NHS Lothian now has in an area that is increasing its population and, crucially, the lack of social care. Those were not issues that started during Covid. In fact, they were not even issues that began as a result of our leaving the EU—they were in place long before then. From repeated comments made by representatives of the BMA, we know that they are seriously worried about patient safety being put at risk every single day. I will not be the only member who has received repeated references of constituents who cannot get through to the NHS and end up going to accident and emergency.

SNP and Green members voted against Labour’s proposal to debate those issues today, and they opted for their number 1 priority, which is to debate the constitution rather than tackle the health and cost of living crises, which are getting worse.

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

Will the member take an intervention?

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I will, briefly.

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

The member asks why we are talking about independence. We have already—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Allan, please ensure that your card is in and your microphone is on.

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

It is in.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Is your microphone on? It does not sound like it.

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

My card is in.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Your microphone is not coming on, so perhaps you could try using another seat. I apologise to Ms Boyack; I will reflect that interruption in the time allowed to her.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I appreciate that, Presiding Officer.

I mentioned that issue because it is up to members to decide what we want to debate. My view is that the choice of this subject is more about internal SNP strategic discussions than it is about the country‘s interest. Newspapers published before the debate told us that we would be offered a detailed blueprint for independence, yet what did the cabinet secretary do today? He gave us repeated interpretations of history from his perspective; he did not talk about the future. Once again, he offered us a false choice: the status quo or another divisive independence referendum.

Scottish Labour is not against constitutional change. Over our history we have advocated for and delivered constitutional change. We delivered the Scottish Parliament, which has been strengthened since its establishment. We have done that on a cross-party basis. We have been prepared to speak to people.