Scottish Parliament, 1 March 2023

288 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

Constitution, External Affairs and Culture

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon, colleagues. The first item of business is portfolio question time. The first portfolio is constitution, external affairs and culture. As ever, if members wish to ask a supplementary question, I invite them to press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.

There is a fair bit of interest in the questions, so I make my usual plea for brevity in questions and responses.

Heritage Sites (Inspection)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

1. To ask the Scottish Government when the nationwide programme of inspection to assess the condition of, and the impact of climate change on, some of Scotland’s most significant heritage sites, being undertaken by Historic Environment Scotland, is expected to be completed. (S6O-01932)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The inspection programme continues to progress well. Tactile inspections have been carried out at 30 sites across Scotland since last May. Historic Environment Scotland has been able to reopen a number of sites in Claire Baker’s region, including Doune castle, Burleigh castle, and Inchcolm abbey. There is full or partial access to more than 80 per cent of the properties in care, and Historic Environment Scotland continues to assess the potential to reopen sites as soon as it is safe to do so. I will continue to urge it to do so as quickly as possible.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Although the safety of sites is paramount, it is unfortunate that progress is not being made more quickly. The inspection programme has now moved on to level 2 sites, which include Aberdour castle, in my region. I was pleased to visit it recently, and I met HES when I was there.

In 2019, the castle had more than 20,000 visitors, and I know that the minister recognises the impact of that on local visitors. Aberdour has much to offer, but part of its attraction, particularly for international visitors, is the castle. Has the Government made any assessment of what additional support towns and villages such as Aberdour will need during such prolonged periods of closure?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I can attest to my family’s relationship with Aberdour—my children love Aberdour beach.

The Aberdour castle site is partially open. The walled gardens and driveway were made accessible last October, the inspection was completed in November and work is going on to reopen the internal areas, with some restrictions—the date for that is yet to be confirmed.

I am happy to either meet Claire Baker or ensure that HES can meet her, because she is right to say that such sites are important anchors for local communities—that is well known—and I want to make sure that she is aware of the progress that has been made.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Last week, Historic Environment Scotland’s chief executive informed a packed meeting that was organised by Linlithgow Civic Trust that Linlithgow palace is to partially reopen in May, following necessary works, which is welcome news. However, bearing in mind the damage to the north range of Linlithgow palace and, indeed, the many other properties that still face significant and continuing damage from the elements, will the minister consider a new and comprehensive ruins management strategy to ensure that our much-loved and valued ruined heritage can be managed into the future?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I am pleased that Fiona Hyslop was able to have such a successful meeting with the local community and that HES was able to give good news. Like her, I welcome the partial reopening of Linlithgow palace in May and the work that is being undertaken by HES to inspect and repair other properties in care.

The properties in care include some of Scotland’s most iconic and culturally significant assets, including Linlithgow palace, and we recently consulted more broadly on a refreshed strategy for Scotland’s historic environment, which seeks to prioritise activity such as that suggested by Fiona Hyslop, which supports economic recovery and renewal. That strategy focuses on creating a more resilient and sustainable historic environment and helps to communicate the contribution that the historic environment makes to our nation.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

The core conservation costs for properties in care in 2021-22 were £7.7 million. That represents a 14 per cent reduction from 2017-18. The decline in the provision has been a consistent trend over the past five years. Given the impact of closed heritage sites on tourism and the local economy, can the minister tell me what discussions he has had with HES to ensure that funding for conservation and maintenance is maintained, if not increased, so that no more sites close and those that are closed reopen as quickly as possible?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Obviously, Historic Environment Scotland has its own decisions to make, but I have regular meetings with HES’s representatives about its strategic priorities, as I have outlined to previous questioners. The Scottish Government has substantially increased resource to Historic Environment Scotland in recognition of not just the impact of the pandemic on HES’s commercial income but the need to ensure that our properties in care are maintained. Over 2022-23, we will support Historic Environment Scotland with £60.6 million to maintain Scotland’s heritage and historic environment, which is an 80 per cent increase on pre-pandemic levels of funding. HES is working hard to reopen our heritage sites as soon as it is safe to do so, and we continue to support that endeavour.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 2 was withdrawn.

Northern Ireland Protocol Bill

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

3. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any engagement it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the potential impact on Scotland of the on-going negotiations over the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill. (S6O-01934)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I welcome the progress, which was announced this week, on the Northern Ireland protocol. The Scottish Government consistently called for the UK Government to withdraw its irresponsible Northern Ireland Protocol Bill and to seek a sustainable, negotiated solution to that entirely avoidable and deeply damaging dispute with our European neighbours.

However, Scotland is still left with Brexit and all of the damage that comes with it. I urge the UK Government now to seize the opportunity to start the overdue work of repairing relations with our European Union partners more widely and rebuilding closer co-operation and partnership across the many areas in which Scotland’s interests have been harmed by Brexit.

In addition, the UK Government must now clarify the policy on Northern Ireland to Great Britain trade. That will be crucial to understanding the impact on devolved responsibilities, including physical checks on food safety and animal and plant health, as well as required associated infrastructure such as the border control post at Cairnryan.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

If all is well and that goes through, we look forward to a return to horizon funding. However, can it be right that Scotland, which voted overwhelmingly to remain within the EU, has been ignored and is feeling the full force of a hard Brexit while Mr Sunak shamelessly boasts about the huge economic benefits that access to the EU single market will bring for Northern Ireland?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

We have repeatedly called for the UK Government to find a negotiated solution to that entirely avoidable dispute with the European Union. The Scottish Government unequivocally supports the Good Friday agreement and we welcome the new agreement that has been announced on the Northern Ireland protocol. Scotland did not vote for Brexit, yet we continue to suffer from its consequences, including the exacerbation of the current cost of living crisis. While Northern Ireland has been given preferential access to the huge European single market, Scotland, which voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU, has been ignored by the UK Government and subjected to the full damage of a disastrous hard Brexit. The Scottish Government is now carefully considering the deal and what it means for Scotland. Brexit has brought nothing but harm to people, communities and businesses in Scotland, and the Scottish Government remains committed to realising Scotland’s potential as an independent nation within the European Union.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

For decades, the troubles in Ireland have cost lives, ruined families and destroyed communities, and the situation has required delicate, pragmatic, exhausting engagement and diplomacy by great leaders over many years. Therefore, forgive me if I get a bit exasperated by politicians here who seek to exploit the developments in Northern Ireland in order to advance their own narrow agenda. Will the First Minister—and the minister here—think again about drawing parallels between Northern Ireland and Scotland?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I do not think that we have enough time to do that question justice. As we have learned from the developments this week, it would have been perfectly possible to reach an agreement in principle before now, but that was impossible given the confrontational approach of the previous UK Prime Minister—notwithstanding his claim that he had an oven-ready deal. It behoves all of us to understand that Northern Ireland remaining in the single European market means that Northern Ireland will have a competitive advantage relative to Scotland and Scottish businesses. [

Interruption

.] That is a statement of fact; I do not know whether Willie Rennie disagrees with that.

Regardless of where stand on the question of whether Scotland should be a sovereign member state of the European Union, it is going to become ever more apparent that Northern Ireland is in an exceptionally privileged position—the Prime Minister himself described it as such—and that Scotland is at a disadvantage.

I hope that the Liberal Democrats and their fellow parties that, at one stage, supported membership of the European Union but now support Brexit will think again and stand up for Scotland’s social, economic and political interests, at least for this.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

The cabinet secretary has mentioned harm. Does he agree that the renegotiated NI protocol could have a harmful impact on Scottish businesses that no longer have access to the EU market, as has been mentioned, while Northern Ireland businesses enjoy those benefits?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

A

s briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I have already put on record that I think that it is a good thing that Northern Ireland is able to remain in the single European market. It is something that the Scottish Government has supported while, at the same time, saying that Scotland voted to remain in the European Union and that, if it is possible to find an arrangement for part of the United Kingdom to remain in the single European market, surely it must be possible to find that for another, namely Scotland.

Unfortunately, the UK Government chose to ignore that, although it would have been entirely possible. Therefore, we find ourselves in a situation in which, notwithstanding the fact that we think that it is a good thing that a solution has been found for Northern Ireland, we recognise that Scotland not having that status in the single European market puts Scotland at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to inward investment and our exporting industries. Surely, that should be obvious to everybody in the chamber.

No doubt, we will come back to the issue over the months and years ahead.

Sistema Scotland

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to support the work of Sistema Scotland. (S6O-01935)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Sistema Scotland is a brilliant example of how lives can be changed and enriched through culture. Its work contributes to many Scottish Government policy outcomes—in particular, our ambitions to tackle child poverty.

The Scottish Government has supported Sistema Scotland with annual funding since 2012, providing £1.1 million in 2022-23. In addition, we have established a cross-portfolio reference group for Sistema Scotland to understand where its excellent work aligns with priorities across Government. The group’s next meeting is due to take place in the spring.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for that answer and for his support for this vital organisation.

Last week, the Scottish National Party councillors on Dundee City Council cut all financial support for Sistema Scotland’s Big Noise Douglas and, right now, the SNP council in Aberdeen city is cutting all funding. Vital and effective support—which is proven by research from the Glasgow Centre for Population Health—for 1,250 of the most disadvantaged children in Scotland has been swept away. Yesterday, the world-renowned Gustavo Dudamel of the Los Angeles Philharmonic said that those programmes in Scotland have been an

“inspiration to the world and planted seeds with millions of children everywhere.”

What will the Government do now? Will it be true to its own words or will culture be only for the privileged few? We know that the programme works. Will the minister step forward where other SNP members have failed?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We are already engaging with Sistema Scotland. The Deputy First Minister met the organisation only a few weeks ago around how we can continue to support the work that it does. We are aware of the decisions that have been taken at a local authority level, which are concerning given the value of the work that Sistema Scotland does in local authorities across Scotland, and we are working closely with the organisation to showcase the impact of its work.

I must emphasise that local authorities are accountable to the public that elects them, and they have the financial freedom to operate independently, taking account of local needs. As a former councillor, I know that Michael Marra will understand and agree with that.

We will continue to work with Sistema and with our local authority partners, to which we are providing nearly £13.5 billion through the local government settlement in 2023-24. However, councils are autonomous and it is their responsibility to agree budgets, considering their statutory duties and local and national priorities.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I share the minister’s views on Sistema

and the good work that it does in our communities, which is why I am absolutely disgusted with the SNP-Liberal Democrat administration at Aberdeen City Council for axing the budget for Big Noise Torry, which was a budget that I protected while I was council leader for four years.

Will the minister now intervene to find a way to save Big Noise Torry?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

This an issue for our local authorities to determine;

it is not for MSPs or Government ministers to intervene in local government decisions. That is a general principle to which most of us normally subscribe.

We will continue to work with Sistema Scotland and our local government partners to provide services that allow people to carry on enjoying cultural experiences and to ensure that children, in particular, can enjoy the types of offerings that organisations such as Sistema Scotland provide to lift them out of poverty and to ensure that they have the aspiration to continue to contribute through culture.

I will ensure that those issues continue to be reported in the work that we do.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 5 was not lodged.

Gender-specific Risk and Safety Planning (Ukrainian Refugees)

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what gender-specific risk and safety planning is carried out to support Ukrainian refugees at the point of their arrival in Scotland, as well as in the medium and long term. (S6O-01937)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Ruth Maguire can be assured that ensuring the wellbeing and safety of Ukrainian people through early identification of risk and need is central to our response, as it has been from the very outset of our programme.

Our welcome hubs conduct trauma-informed initial assessments to identify any immediate welfare or protection concerns. That includes gender-specific risks. On-going support is tailored on the basis of the needs of the individual and is delivered locally. The Scottish Government is working with various safeguarding partners to inform our approach. That is linked to equally safe, which is our strategy to prevent and eradicate violence against women and girls.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

We know that, once trafficking happens, it is very difficult to recover victims of trafficking. Last week, the cross-party group on human trafficking heard from experts that the risks that increase people’s vulnerability include insecure accommodation, relationship breakdown and complacency from authorities. In saying that, it was putting a challenge to all of us. Does the minister agree not only that there is the opportunity to be awake to the threat and to work together to prevent that heinous crime before it happens, but that it is imperative on us all to do so?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I agree—100 per cent—with Ruth Maguire.

Guidance for practitioners involved in safeguarding people arriving from Ukraine, to identify and respond to risk and need, has been published and is regularly reviewed. In 2022-23, we are providing £622,000 to the Trafficking Awareness Raising Alliance to support adult females trafficked for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation. That is in addition to more than £2.5 million that was provided to the Migrant Help charity during this financial year to support all the adult victims of human trafficking and exploitation in Scotland.

Given her clear interest and long-standing work in the area, I would be more than happy to meet Ruth Maguire to talk about the issue in more detail.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Foysol Choudhury has a brief supplementary.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

The SEREDA—sexual and gender-based violence against refugees: from displacement to arrival—project in Scotland recently launched its report on sexual and gender-based violence among refugees in Scotland. The report highlights the urgent need for services in Scotland to focus on forced migrant survivors of sexual and gender-based violence, including a dedicated working group to address the specific needs of survivors. Given the continued influx of refugees into Scotland from Ukraine, what action is the Scottish Government taking to consider the report’s recommendations?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I would be more than happy to consider that. In addition to the £622,000 funding for trafficking awareness and more than £2.5 million provided to Migrant Help that I mentioned in response to Ruth Maguire’s question, we are also funding and working directly with the Scottish Refugee Council. It provides initial support and it is also helping us to ensure that, from a policy perspective, we are responding in the most effective way.

As I said, I would be more than happy to consider what Foysol Choudhury has raised, and I thank him for his support and work in this area.

European Policy Alignment

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how it is ensuring that Scotland keeps as aligned as possible with European policy developments. (S6O-01938)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government is committed to remaining close to the European Union and to building the strongest possible relationship between the EU and Scotland. Our alignment policy protects the wellbeing of the people of Scotland by maintaining and advancing the standards that we share with the EU, wherever it is practical and possible to do that under the current constitutional settlement. That policy was approved by this Parliament in June 2022 and it is being delivered through evidence-based policy making and stakeholder engagement.

Our alignment policy helps to realise the vision that we share for the continent’s future and its part in the world, from ensuring our people’s prosperity to tackling the climate emergency and supporting the people Ukraine, and it helps to pave the way for an independent Scotland’s return to the EU in the future.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Can the cabinet secretary confirm that that work is properly resourced, in order that Scotland, given the opportunity, can join the European Union as seamlessly as possible? Can he also confirm that, with all the United Kingdom’s political parties—Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat—embracing Brexit and having no intention of rejoining the EU, the only road to Scotland joining the EU is through independence?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Yes, and the Scottish Government’s approach focuses on maintaining and advancing the high standards that we share with the European Union, where that is possible. Consideration of that is integral to our approach to evidence-based policy making across the full range of devolved policy areas.

At the same time, the UK Government’s Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill threatens those high standards and undermines devolution, which is why this Parliament has agreed not to give consent to that bill.

The member also references other parties’ policies in relation to the EU. Labour, of course, does not just now support Brexit; it supports the hard Brexit that was negotiated by Boris Johnson, which keeps Scotland and the UK out of the huge European single market and customs union, despite all the economic damage that that is causing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I will take a brief supplementary from Sarah Boyack, who joins us online.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

It will come as no surprise to the cabinet secretary that I am going to raise the issue of transparency; I have raised it before. My question is about the ability of MSPs to scrutinise where the Scottish Government decides to keep pace with EU legislation and where it does not. That transparency is severely constrained due to a lack of information.

Will the cabinet secretary confirm whether the Scottish Government is still considering the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee’s proposal for a memorandum of understanding between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament, on providing information on and scrutiny of the Government’s approach to keeping pace with key pieces of EU legislation?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I am happy to confirm to Sarah Boyack that our officials are continuing to work with parliamentary officials on the question of European Union alignment. That is about not just the historical issues, but the forthcoming challenge of the retained European Union law process that we will have to go through. I am absolutely seized of that matter. It will, no doubt, be a subject that Sarah Boyack and others in Parliament will wish to be reassured on. I am happy to give the commitment to her that I want us to have the best transparency in place as we go forward and to make sure that members understand the ways in which the Scottish Government intends for us to remain aligned with European Union law.

Malawi Development Programme

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

8. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of its contributions to development in Malawi through its Malawi development programme 2018-23. (S6O-01939)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The Scottish Government has committed £11.4 million to the current programme for projects that contribute to the achievement of the United Nations sustainable development goals. An example is our project that has established Malawi’s first dental school, which now has more students enrolled than there are registered dentists in Malawi, 50 per cent of whose latest intake is female.

We require six-monthly progress reports before any grant payments are made, which allows for on-going assessment of each project’s contribution to development in Malawi. Grant-holders are also required to provide an end-project report with details of the project’s achievements and any lessons learned.

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

I think that we would all agree that the partnership between Malawi and Scotland remains important—perhaps now more than ever, as both countries face immense global challenges.

How is the Scottish Government ensuring continued support for Malawi and other partner countries such as Rwanda and Zambia beyond March 2023?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Christine Grahame’s question allows me to re-emphasise the importance of, and how proud I am of, the incredible and durable relationship between Scotland and Malawi and the incredible work that is done by our partners, including the Scotland Malawi Partnership and the Malawi Scotland Partnership, to ensure that that relationship can be continued and sustained.

We are working on the design of our new programmes to implement the outcomes of our international development review. While that programming is under way, I have taken the decision to extend our existing cohort of projects until March 2024. The additional spend on those programmes will help to ensure that the Scottish Government continues to support our partner countries and that we utilise our international development fund in an efficient and effective manner.

Across our whole programme, the Scottish Government remains in close contact with our partners in Malawi, Rwanda and Zambia. We are aware of the immense challenges in those countries and continue to respond to them as we can.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We will have a very brief supplementary from Alexander Stewart.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

NHS Tayside developed the Scottish emergency medicine-Malawi project, with the aim of delivering in Malawi a national emergency and trauma network. What progress has been made on that project to date?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Minister, briefly.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I hope that the correspondence that I have sent to Mr Stewart will be of assistance in that regard. As I have said, we are in the process of reviewing and restarting some of our programmes, where there is an opportunity for groups and bids to be brought forward. I would be happy to continue to work with Mr Stewart and others who are looking to be part of that.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes portfolio questions on constitution, external affairs and culture. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next portfolio.

Justice and Veterans

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The next portfolio is justice and veterans. Again, if members wish to ask a supplementary, I invite them to press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question. We again have quite a bit of interest, so I ask for brief questions and responses, please.

Domestic Abuse Legislation

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress being made to ensure that domestic abuse legislation better reflects victims’ experiences. (S6O-01940)

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

We must treat domestic abuse survivors with compassion and make available services that acknowledge the significant trauma that they have experienced. Our victim-centred approach fund has awarded £48 million to provide support to victims, including £18.5 million for specialist advocacy support for survivors of gender-based violence. Research on the operation of our groundbreaking domestic abuse legislation found that it better reflects victims’ experiences. However, I am acutely aware that more needs to be done, and I am committed to working with our partners across the justice system to do that, including through legislative reform and rolling out trauma-informed practice.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I, too, welcome the findings of the recent interim report on the groundbreaking domestic abuse legislation, which highlights the beneficial impact of including emotional and psychological abuse in that area of the law. Will the minister outline how the measures in the 2023-24 budget will support the on-going work to ensure that victims’ rights and needs are at the centre of Scotland’s criminal justice system?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

We are strengthening how justice services and wider public services support victims through our budget. That includes continuation of support to more than 20 organisations through the victim-centred approach fund and support to victims of violent crime in Scotland through the criminal injuries compensation scheme.

As part of our vision for justice and the commitment to support victims on their journey to healing and recovery, we must offer approaches in justice that place victims at their heart. A victims advisory board has been established by the victims task force to ensure that victims’ experiences are directly informing our action and the actions of our justice partners. I know that Jackie Dunbar will welcome the establishment of the women’s justice leadership panel, which I chair, and which is looking at how we address gender inequality and improve women’s experiences in the justice system.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

One way that we can crack down on domestic abuse is to legislate to crack down on forced marriages involving young people. The minister will be aware of the steps taken in England and Wales to raise the age of consent for marriage to 18. Does the Scottish Government plan to do the same?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

That is something that the Scottish Government is actively looking at.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

A report published by the Scottish Government this month looked into the experience of families who have fallen victim to domestic abuse. Female victims of domestic abuse told interviewers of their harrowing experiences in the courtroom, with their abusers exhibiting intimidating and threatening behaviour towards them before and during the trial. In one case that I know of, a complainer of rape alleges that her abuser’s solicitor turned to the galleries and pointed at her during sentencing. Does the minister believe that there should be clear protocols for behaviour in courtrooms that should be enforced, and clear ways to complain about any incidents?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

In 2021, in consultation with the victims task force, we commissioned NHS Education for Scotland to create a knowledge and skills framework specifically to support the development of a trauma-informed workforce in the justice sector. The framework was endorsed by the victims task force at a meeting on 7 December 2022. We are acutely aware of that issue.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

A number of my constituents have advised me that their abusive ex-partners were able to continue to abuse them in ways that were difficult to evidence in court, despite the robust legislation that is in place. For example, ex-partners have used child contact arrangements to exert control. What action can be taken to increase understanding across the justice system of the often insidious nature of abuse—we have just heard an example of that—to ensure that even less obvious examples of abuse are recognised as such?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

I fully appreciate the need to ensure that abuse is recognised across the justice system, in both criminal and civil cases. In relation to child contact cases, the legislation requires the court to have regard to abuse and the risk of abuse. The Scottish Government is committed to preparing a discussion paper on the interaction between criminal and civil cases. A key part of that will involve considering how all forms of abuse can be tackled in order to prevent the situations that were clearly narrated by Fiona Hyslop.

Cybercrime

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to tackle cybercrime. (S6O-01941)

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

The Scottish Government works closely with national and United Kingdom partners—including Police Scotland, the National Cyber Security Centre and the Cyber and Fraud Centre Scotland—to tackle fraud and cybercrime and to reduce the harm that they inflict on communities in Scotland.

A range of advice to help people to improve their online safety can be found at cyberscotland.com, as well as on the National Cyber Security Centre, Cyber Aware, Take Five and Get Safe Online websites. Victims of any crime should phone Police Scotland.

I highlight that it is currently cyber Scotland week, which I opened at the FutureScot cybersecurity conference on Monday. More than 100 events are taking place across the country to raise awareness of being safe and secure online, and to promote cybersecurity careers.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that full response.

In recent years, there has been a huge shift in small firms moving their business online. However, BT research shows that thousands of Scotland’s small firms could be open to cyberattack because they have little or no business-grade cybersecurity in place. Almost half of those businesses suffered cyberbreaches last year.

What specific measures are in place to help our small businesses? Are there plans to step up the share of police resources that are dedicated to tackling cybercrime?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

Kenny Gibson has raised a very important point, not least because it has been shown that smaller companies are now being attacked through cybercrimes—particularly ransomware and so on—whereas, in the past, it tended to be larger companies that were affected.

The Scottish Government has funded Cyber Scotland to partner ScotlandIS to engage with and support the information technology managed services sector, as many small businesses rely on it for their security. We also support another partner, the Cyber and Fraud Centre Scotland—which was previously the Scottish Business Resilience Centre—in hosting a cyberincident response helpline, which aims to offer first-line incident support to small businesses.

The allocation of other resources is a matter for Police Scotland. However, despite UK Government austerity, the Scottish Government has increased police funding year on year since 2016-17. In 2023-24, the service will receive additional resource funding of £80 million, which represents a 6.3 per cent increase.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The National Crime Agency has estimated that up to 850,000 people in the UK pose a sexual threat to children. That is a truly horrifying and terrifying statistic. Two years ago, Police Scotland’s award-winning get help or get caught campaign targeted people who might seek to groom children online or in real life. Given the constant online threat to children, will the Government be introducing any similar measures or initiatives?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

We work very closely with the UK Government in that general area. We have done so in relation to its Online Safety Bill, a number of provisions of which relate to exactly the kind of crimes that Russell Findlay is talking about. It is best that we work together with the UK Government, as we do, on issues that have no borders—there are no borders online. If we did not do so, that would not be an effective mechanism to stop such crimes, so we work in conjunction with the UK Government and other partners.

The Scottish Police Authority, through the serious organised crime group, looks at a number of ways in which children can be victims through online activity. That includes human trafficking as well as sexual abuse.

A great deal of work is on-going. I am happy to provide Russell Findlay with further information on other initiatives in writing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 3 was not lodged.

Question 4 is from Natalie Don, who joins us online.

Victim Surcharge Fund

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

4. To ask the Scottish Government how the victim surcharge fund is aiming to support women who are victims of domestic abuse. (S6O-01943)

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

The victim surcharge fund has opened three times to applications from organisations that provide support to victims of crime. So far, 11 organisations—including Victim Support Scotland, Dumbarton District Women’s Aid, Edinburgh Women’s Aid and Angus Women’s Aid—have shared more than £917,000 of grant funding to provide practical help directly to victims, including victims of domestic abuse.

Examples of support that has been provided by the fund include the meeting of clothing and other essential expenses for those escaping domestic abuse and the installation of alarm and video systems to help victims to feel safe.

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

The trauma and fear that victims of domestic abuse suffer is incomprehensible for many people, and the support that is required can vary. A whole range of organisations in Scotland—a few of which the minister has named—play a vital role in supporting women through the most difficult of circumstances.

Renfrewshire Women’s Aid, which operates in my constituency, offers tailored support to women experiencing domestic abuse. However, I note that it did not receive funding from the victim surcharge fund. I ask the minister if and when there will be a fourth round of the funding. What other funding opportunities are there for organisations that provide support for victims of domestic abuse?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

The victim surcharge fund will open to more applications once sufficient money has been collected, which we anticipate will be towards the end of this year. So far, all organisations that offer support to domestic abuse survivors which have applied have received funding. In the meantime, organisations that support victims of domestic abuse which have not applied to the victim surcharge fund can approach Victim Support Scotland for help on behalf of those whom they are supporting, as Victim Support Scotland manages an emergency assistance fund, which is partly funded through the victim support surcharge fund. I encourage Natalie Don—and, indeed, all MSPs—to ensure that that is well known.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

Given the context of increasing anti-immigrant sentiment in some parts of Scotland, what signposting and support are available to women survivors of domestic abuse who have no recourse to public funds?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

I know that, like me, Maggie Chapman has a keen interest in that area.

The Scottish Government is clear that women with no recourse to public funds should be offered the same level of support that other women in Scotland are and that they should not face disadvantage. We continue to urg

e the United Kingdom Government to ensure that all victims of domestic abuse are afforded the same protections and support. Our ending destitution together strategy presses the UK Government to extend the destitution domestic violence concession to make it available to anyone who is in the UK as a dependant on someone else’s visa or protection status, regardless of the timescales of that status. We will continue to make the case in the strongest of terms.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

To ensure that the fund is fully utilised, will the Scottish Government ensure that it is available and well communicated across rural Scotland and island areas for the benefit of all women who are victims of domestic abuse?

Elena Whitham (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

Absolutely. I can give Beatrice Wishart the assurance that we will seek to ensure that it is communicated effectively.

Victims of Crime (Notice of Court Cases)

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

5. To ask the Scottish Government whether all victims of crime are given notice in advance of their case going to court. (S6O-01944)

The Lord Advocate (Dorothy Bain KC)

The Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014 provides all victims of crime with the right to request and obtain information about their case. That includes information on the stage that any criminal proceedings have reached.

In relation to victims in our most serious cases, including sexual, domestic abuse, stalking and hate crimes, and in relation to bereaved relatives who have lost a loved one through crime, the Crown provides notice without any request, so long as the individual victim or bereaved relative so wishes.

I should make the point that the provision of information to victims was considered by the Parliament during the passage of the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Bill, which became the 2014 act, and the enacted legislation reflects the decision of Parliament to enable victims to receive that information should they wish it.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I am aware of examples in the Highlands where victims have not been notified in advance of when the trial is going to court, and they have sometimes read the outcome in the press. Can the Lord Advocate confirm whether that issue is widespread throughout Scotland and, if so, how many victims have not received advance notification of trials in the past year?

The Lord Advocate

I

should say to Mr Mountain that, before today, an inquiry was made of his office to ascertain whether the question was prompted by any specific prosecution or complaint, and I was advised that the question was simply a generic one.

I would request that Mr Mountain contact the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service with examples of the cases to which he has referred. I will look at them and follow up the specific cases that he wishes to raise. That is the response that I am able to give today, only as a follow-up to the question posed.

If there are specific cases where there has been no notification or where some difficulty has been communicated to Mr Mountain and his office, I am more than happy to hear about that and to respond in specific detail.

Court Buildings (Maintenance)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service capital budget for 2023-24 on the amount of maintenance work required in court buildings across the country. (S6O-01945)

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

Prioritisation of maintenance work in Scotland’s courts and tribunals is an operational matter for the SCTS. Essential capital works are carried out on a priority basis, informed by an on-going programme of condition surveys. The capital position is particularly challenging across a number of portfolios, including justice. Despite that, we have been able to increase the capital allocation to the SCTS in 2023-24 by £4.7 million towards known capital pressures, on top of the baseline £8 million annual capital allocation. Current levels of Scottish Government capital funding should ensure that the programme of maintenance will continue.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I think the cabinet secretary for the answer, but the last time that the SCTS faced such difficult financial circumstances, it closed 10 sheriff courts, including Arbroath and Stonehaven in my region. There is a £7.3 million maintenance backlog in our courts, and the spectre of 2013 is never far from the minds of those in local justice. Will the cabinet secretary provide them with the certainty that they need and say that there will be no more court closures in the lifetime of this session of Parliament?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

It is important to provide some context for what the member mentions with regard to the 10 sheriff courts that were closed in 2015. It is worth pointing out that that context necessarily includes what we receive from the United Kingdom Government and what it spends on justice. The two are inextricably linked, as I am sure that the member will acknowledge. In England and Wales, for example, there were 239 court—

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Can you answer the question, Keith? Come on.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I do not know whether this is uncomfortable to hear, but please do me the courtesy of listening to the answer to the question that you asked, if that is possible—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Cabinet secretary, please resume your seat. We have had a good session so far in which questions have been asked and responses have been provided. Can we continue in a similar vein, Mr Kerr?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

There have been 239 court closures in England and Wales since 2010.

With reference to the courts, the following is a quotation from the Bar Council:

“Crumbling court buildings that are not fit-for-purpose, including leaks, infestations, and a lack of basic facilities”.

The obvious link is that what they spend on justice in England and Wales has a direct consequence for what is spent in Scotland. Despite that, and in response to Mr Kerr’s point, we have no current plans to initiate further court closures in Scotland—that is also despite the appalling funding from England and Wales and the UK Government.

Suicide Prevention (Prison Population)

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking, in partnership with the Scottish Prison Service, national health service boards and others to support the health and wellbeing of people in prison and prevent deaths by suicide. (S6O-01946)

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

We recognise that people in prison often present with higher levels of risk and vulnerability than the general population as a whole. We are committed to ensuring that they can access healthcare that is, as a minimum, equal to that offered in the community. We are working with the Scottish Prison Service and national health service boards to improve health outcomes for people living in our prisons, including preventing deaths by suicide. The work is informed by the Scottish Government’s prison healthcare needs assessments, the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland’s report on prisoner mental health support and the “Independent Review of the Response to Deaths in Prison Custody”.

Across that work, we will embed the principles of “Time, Space, Compassion”, to ensure that people are able to access high-quality, compassionate, appropriate and timely support that supports wellbeing and recovery.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. According to a University of Glasgow report, there has been a 42 per cent rise in lives lost to suicide in Scottish prisons since 2016. Last year’s progress report on the

“Independent Review of the Response to Deaths in Prison Custody” showed that uptake of the review’s recommendations has been disappointingly slow. Therefore, can the cabinet secretary provide reassurances that progress is being accelerated towards implementing all the recommendations in the review?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

My thoughts are, first and foremost, with anyone who has lost a loved one to suicide in prison custody. Every death by suicide is a tragedy. We are committed to working with partners to implement the recommendations of the independent review of deaths in custody. Although the progress report in December recognised that some of the issues are complex and will take some time to resolve and implement, as the member suggests, greater pace

is needed.

Following the publication of the progress report, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and I jointly wrote to chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service and to all NHS Scotland chief executives and integration authority chief officers to request that greater priority be given to timely implementation of the recommendations.

Gillian Imery, the former chief inspector of constabulary for Scotland, will continue in her role as the external chair of the review into late 2023, providing support and leadership to implement the recommendations. A further update on progress will be published later this year.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I understand that the SPS suicide prevention in prison strategy is currently under review, and I welcome the commitment to improve provisions for people who live in our prisons, but will the cabinet secretary outline what steps are being taken ahead of the publication of the review to improve prisoner mental wellbeing?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

In partnership with its stakeholders, the Government commissioned a comprehensive needs assessment of the prison population in relation to social care, substance use, mental health and physical health. We are working with senior leaders from across the Scottish Government, the Prison Service and national health service boards to provide additional oversight and to drive forward priority improvements.

We are fully engaged with the SPS in the development of the Scottish Government’s new mental health and wellbeing strategy. The Scottish Government also sits on the SPS mental health and wellbeing steering group. That close working is informing our collective approach to improving wellbeing and suicide prevention in all our prisons.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The minister will have heard deep concern from all sides of the chamber today about the high rates of suicide and also other deaths. Will he give us an indication of how quickly we are going to get the situation turned around? I have heard the detail of the answers that he has provided, but when will we see some returns on that investment?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I mentioned in my original substantive answer that we expect a further update from the chair of the review later this year, but a lot of the actions are already being implemented. For example, simply making sure that the family are told immediately was not done routinely previously, but is now being done by governors and their associates. Such actions are being implemented now, but, as I said, a further update will take place this year to give more information to Willie Rennie and the chamber.

Reconviction Statistics (2019-20 Cohort)

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the outcome of its investigation into the provision of reconviction statistics for the 2019-20 offender cohort. (S6O-01947)

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

As noted in the response to a previous parliamentary question, S6W-13874,

the heavy impact of the pandemic and subsequent court closures on reconvictions data means that user needs for information must be balanced against

“the provision of meaningful and informative statistics that carry minimal risk of misinterpretation.”

The investigation into what information we could helpfully provide to users in respect of reconvictions statistics is still on-going. We plan to communicate the outcome of that investigation by the end of March.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but I am sure that he will agree that third sector-run programmes offering pre and post-discharge support to prisoners can play a hugely important role in reducing reoffending

and improving outcomes more generally. Given that the funding for such projects relies on their being able to demonstrate their effectiveness with empirical data, does he agree that it is vital that data such as reconviction statistics is gathered, validated and published in a reasonable timeframe?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

That is absolutely the case, as the member said. As he will appreciate, if we were to publish the data that we have, it would show a very substantial drop in the year after 2019-20, which saw the first of the lockdowns, for example. The data would probably show quite a dramatic reduction, but it would not be an accurate picture. There is more to it than that.

Furthermore, in order to give meaningful information, we have to do the investigation that I referred to, and we also have to make sure that the statistics provided meet a certain standard. They are gold standard. They are now accredited, vindicated and validated, and we want to make sure that that remains the case. There is no reason for not providing that information other than making sure that it is as accurate as possible, which is what we intend to do.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I will take a brief supplementary question from Audrey Nicoll.

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

I welcome the crime statistics that were released this week, which show a fall in the number of crimes recorded by police last year. The Scottish Government’s vision for justice aims to shift the balance from short-term sentences to community-based interventions, which we know are more effective in reducing reoffending. How will the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Bill help to reduce reoffending, crime and future victimisation?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

That is a really important question. As convener of the Criminal Justice Committee, Audrey Nicoll will know that the bill will help to reduce reoffending and future victimisation by ensuring that public safety and victim protection are at the heart of bail decision making and by improving support for people leaving prison custody.

The bill recognises the negative impact that short periods of imprisonment can have, particularly on those who have not been convicted of a crime, and the evidence that community-based interventions can be more effective at supporting rehabilitation. The bill supports the principle that those who do not pose a risk to public safety or, in certain circumstances, a risk to the delivery of justice should be admitted to bail.

The provision of effective support for people who leave prison reduces their risk of reoffending, which is something that we all want to see. That is why the bill includes reforms to improve pre-release planning and the support that is provided to individuals on release. The bill should be seen alongside our on-going investment in community-based alternatives to custody, as well as our continuing investment in third sector voluntary throughcare services across Scotland.

Local Government Finance (Scotland) Order 2023

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-08007, in the name of Tom Arthur, on the Local Government Finance (Scotland) Order 2023.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

Today’s debate on the Local Government Finance (Scotland) Order 2023 seeks Parliament’s approval for the guaranteed allocations of revenue funding to individual local authorities for 2023-24. It also seeks agreement to the allocation of additional funding for 2022-23 that has been identified since the Local Government Finance (Scotland) Order 2022 was approved on 2 March last year.

We cannot ignore the hugely challenging circumstances in which we have had to agree the Scottish budget this year. Inflation is still running at double digits; in January, it had gone down to 10.1 per cent. At the start of February, the Bank of England raised interest rates to 4 per cent, which is the highest level in 14 years.

Brexit, too, is continuing, and will continue, to cause harm and have an adverse impact on our economy. The International Monetary Fund has forecast that the United Kingdom economy will be the only major economy to shrink in 2023—it expects the UK economy to fall by 0.6 per cent.

Despite that, within the limitations of the devolution settlement, we have used the powers that we have to protect public services, invest in the transition to net zero and take decisive steps towards eradicating child poverty.

The Scottish budget strengthens our social contract with every citizen of Scotland for the wider benefit of society. That means that people in Scotland continue to enjoy many benefits that are not available throughout the UK, including free prescriptions, free access to higher education and the child payment. That also applies at council level. People can access more local services than can be accessed elsewhere in the UK—for example, they can access more fully funded early learning and childcare for all three and four-year-olds; a welfare fund that is delivered locally; and free bus travel for nearly 2 million people, including every child and young person under 22.

The Scottish Government is providing nearly £13.5 billion in the 2023-24 local government finance settlement. That funding includes revenue support of almost £12.6 billion and support for capital expenditure of more than £0.8 billion.

Following the flat cash position that was set out in the resource spending review, we listened to councils and are increasing the resources that will be available next year by £793 million. The 2023-24 local government finance settlement now provides an additional 6.3 per cent, or a real-terms increase of 3 per cent, compared with 2022-23.

As we do every year, to reach that number, we have compared the proposed budget with the allocations that Parliament approved in the previous year. That provides the best like-for-like comparison of available funding.

In addition, individual local authorities will have full flexibility over local council tax rates and the newly devolved empty property relief. The Scottish Government also intends to introduce a local visitor levy bill in Parliament this year, which will, in time, give local authorities a discretionary power to apply a levy on overnight visitor stays in their areas and to utilise that additional funding locally.

It is important to note that the total funding package has already been finalised, following the passing of the Budget (Scotland) (No 2) Bill. Today’s debate seeks Parliament’s approval for the distribution of that approved total funding to individual local authorities.

The order seeks approval for the distribution and payment of almost £11.6 billion of the revenue total of £12.6 billion, with the balance mainly made up of specific grant funding, which is administered separately. The £11.6 billion is a combination of general revenue grant of more than £8.5 billion and the distributable amount of non-domestic rates income, which has been set at just over £3 billion.

The settlement provides continued fiscal certainty through our policy of guaranteeing the combined general revenue grant plus non-domestic rates funding set out in the order. That means that any loss of non-domestic rates income resulting from the impact of Brexit or Covid-19 will be compensated for by increased general revenue grant, unlike the position for councils in, for example, England. That effectively underwrites that critically important revenue stream.

As approved as part of the Scottish budget, the overall funding package for 2023-24 includes £360 million of support for local government pay deals, a £72.5 million increase to the general revenue grant, £105 million to give effect to the devolution of non-domestic rates empty property relief, an extra £50 million capital to help with the expansion of the free school meals policy, additional funding of £100 million to deliver a £10.90 minimum pay settlement for adult social care workers in commissioned services, and consolidation of £30.5 million for the homelessness prevention fund.

There remains a further £330 million of revenue funding that will be notified to local authorities once the distribution has been discussed and agreed with COSLA. That will be included for approval in the 2024 order.

There is specific revenue funding that is paid directly by the relevant policy areas under separate legislation, which amounts to almost £776 million.

The 2023 order seeks approval for almost £371 million of changes to funding allocations for 2022-23. The full list of changes can be found in the report to the 2023 order.

This Government recognises the financial challenges that local authorities across Scotland—and, indeed, the whole public sector—are facing. We acknowledge the importance of providing more fiscal flexibility and more revenue-raising powers for local government.

The fiscal constraints that we share emphasise the need to focus urgently on improving delivery of sustainable public services, designed around the needs and interests of the people and communities of Scotland. We must also continue to press the UK Government for additional funding for our shared priorities and pressures, and I would welcome support from across the Parliament in that respect.

The Budget (Scotland) (No 2) Bill, which Parliament passed last week, ensured that total funding from the Scottish Government to local government next year increased not only in cash terms but in real terms. The order confirms the distribution to individual councils and the proposals reflect the crucial role that local authorities and their employees continue to play in our communities.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that the Local Government Finance (Scotland) Order 2023 [draft] be approved.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Across the world, Governments are meeting, as we are today, to discuss and approve budgets. I was disappointed that the minister did not touch on what has destabilised the whole process, which is President Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. Ministers across the Scottish Government need to start recognising that and including it in their considerations of where we are. It is not just Brexit or Covid-19 but illegal war that is having a real impact on driving up prices and the inflation rate.

I thank all those who work in our local authorities across Scotland for their hard work and commitment to our communities, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. I also thank them for the work that they are undertaking to deliver recovery for our communities—that is something that we should very much recognise. The work that my council in Edinburgh and the council in Glasgow are doing to support Ukrainians and Ukrainian families in Scotland is tremendous. My council has highlighted to ministers pressures around education and housing support that have not been addressed in the budget. We need to make sure that ministers recognise councils’ lasting and on-going support.

The order before us allocates funding for each of Scotland’s 32 local authorities. We do not intend to oppose it, but we continue to raise serious concerns about the overall allocation of resources to local authorities across Scotland and the need for reform of how they are delivered. Council finance chiefs have warned Scottish National Party and Green ministers that Scotland’s local authorities are now facing unprecedented financial pressures. Let us not forget that the Scottish Government’s budget is the largest in devolution history, thanks to additional UK Government funding being allocated during and after the budget process.

The exercise of tracking funding allocations over the past decade points to SNP ministers not passing on to local government the additional resources that they have received. I hope to highlight that today, because, although we have this debate annually, we are not finding the solutions that local government needs. Councils have been left having to find savings and cut local services at the same time. This year, we are witnessing councils taking those difficult decisions and coming together, through COSLA, to condemn, again, their financial settlement.

It is clear that we need a new approach and a new conversation about how we take forward the budget process. The acting finance secretary, John Swinney, in his speech in last week’s stage 3 budget debate, said that the Scottish Government wants a new deal with local government. I agree that there should be a new deal, but it should not be set by just the Scottish Government; the Parliament and all local authorities should be part of the conversation. Ministers need to consider how finances will be properly delivered in the future. I hope that SNP and Green ministers are genuinely able, following this year’s budget process, to pause and reflect on the difficulties that councils say that a similar budget would present them with in the future.

We need the financial relationship between the Scottish Government and local government to be reset. We need a new partnership to be developed that accords respect to our local authorities and gives them the powers and funding that they need to deliver the vital public services on which we all rely.

The minister pointed towards a potential additional tax, which I think that only two councils are considering taking forward.

Wider discussion of local government reform is needed. We need a new fiscal framework for councils, and we need the powers that local authorities currently have to be respected. In that regard, debates about, for example, the national care service, also need to consider reform. To date there has been little scope for reform or discussion of reform, but I hope that an opportunity for that will be presented outside this budget process. Our having a new First Minister, a new finance secretary and new local government ministers will present an opportunity to build a new relationship and have positive discussions about a new funding settlement. Currently, there seems to be a stalemate when it comes to opening up discussions about that important issue, but reform is critical if we are to protect and enhance our local councils and communities.

I do not doubt that councils will continue to face difficult decisions in the coming weeks, months and years. From meeting and speaking to councillors across Scotland, not just from my party but from all parties, I cannot see where councils can find flexibility. In many areas, they have used the sticking plasters that they had to get this budget across the line; there is nothing else for them to cut without resorting to delivering core services and nothing else.

I hope that we can consider that backdrop and the financial pressures, which we all recognise, ahead of next year’s budget. I hope that SNP and Green ministers will reset their approach to how local councils are funded and to the local priorities of each local authority, whether it is rural or urban. I hope that all members of this Parliament will play a role in that. More important, we must ensure that our local authorities are able to deliver for our local communities.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

We will not oppose the order today, because we know that it is necessary to get funding allocated to councils. However, as we indicated during stages 1 and 3 of the budget process, we do not support the 2023-24 budget because it is laced with yet more cuts and could lead to rocketing council tax bills and up to 7,000 jobs going from local government.

Councillors in all 32 local authorities and from every political party, including the SNP, are having to make heartbreaking decisions—decisions that are of this Government’s making. Some £6 billion has been cut from services since 2013, but the Government seems to look the other way.

Roads are crumbling, libraries are closing and bins are overflowing. Staff have been left with no option but to strike, which has left schools closed across the country. Now, it is left to councillors to take tough decisions to balance the books. There have been council tax increases of 5 per cent, 6 per cent, 7 per cent and up to 10 per cent across the country.

Not only has the Government passed the buck during a cost of living crisis when food, utility and housing bills are soaring, but the public will have to pay for worse services and foot the bill for the SNP’s neglect of local councils and communities.

In my region, SNP-led Falkirk Council asked its executive to green light a plan to put 133 buildings up for sale. School pools, Grangemouth stadium, sports halls, gyms, park buildings and village and community halls were all flogged to fill a deficit, and with them went 200 jobs. SNP-led Aberdeen City Council’s review could result in swathes of its services, including social work, its welfare fund, council tax collection, health and safety enforcement and free school meals being put up as options for outsourcing.

The smoke and mirrors, political spin and, at times, what verges on dishonest presentation of the budget figures and their impact meant that there was no real debate about the budget; there was only game playing and spin that defied and denied reality. At the time, ministers complained about changes to their budget in real terms, but they talked in the same breath about changes to local government budgets in cash terms.

We spent hours in the chamber, demanding an honest discussion about where we would spend additional funding and where we would cut, but the truth is that, with no honest starting point, we never had a conversation. When the Government claimed during the initial allocation in the budget process that there would be an uplift of £570 million to local government, where was the honest conversation? How could we possibly have an honest starting point when that was the Government claim? Even if that was true and realistic, it was still only half of what the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities had asked for to protect essential services. Even that figure did not make it to the end of the day, because the true number was £71 million once existing policy commitments were taken into account.

The Fraser of Allander Institute set the record straight, making it clear that the Government’s funding proposal would represent a real-terms cut to local government budgets. Even the £223 million that was announced at stage 3 was committed spend; it was not additional funding for councils to spend on protecting services. Councils have been left to continue to make cuts. Like every other year, the SNP said that there was no more money, and then we got to stage 3 and it allocated additional funding at the very last minute.

At that point, some councils had already had their budget meetings and some had already set their budgets. When the Government comes to the chamber on the final day of the stage 3 process to announce additional funding, it shows absolute contempt for its so-called partners in local government.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

Will Mark Griffin give way?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please be as brief as possible, minister.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I recognise that the timing can sometimes be suboptimal, to put it mildly, but does Mark Griffin recognise that, ultimately, we have to operate in the wider fiscal UK framework and under Treasury rules? That includes late notification of supplementary estimates within financial years, which can have a cascading and knock-on effect.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You should be winding up now, Mr Griffin.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

I appreciate the impact of the timing of the allocation from the UK Government, but this is a recurring theme. It is a pattern every year in local government budgets: the Government comes to the chamber, tells members that there is no more money left, asks us to identify cuts and, at the very last minute, announces extra money from the back of the sofa or out of a hat. That is treating local council colleagues with contempt.

We will vote for the order to allow councils to get the money that has been allocated to them, but it is clear that it will result in more pain and misery for local communities.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I apologise to members for my late arrival. I was caught up in a broadcast interview that overran.

The tone of Tom Arthur’s remarks is striking. It is completely at odds with what I am hearing from Liberal Democrat councillors who are at the sharp end of the situation. Members on the Government benches must hear it, too, so I am surprised that Green and SNP members are happy to go along with it.

I am relieved that, in Edinburgh—thanks to the Liberal Democrats—more than £5 million-worth of school cuts have been prevented. We promised to stop the assault on education and we have delivered on that. However, that is not to say that putting Edinburgh’s budget together was not incredibly difficult, because the Scottish Government is still cutting that budget by a staggering £76 million. It is figures of that sort that mean that, elsewhere, there are cuts in the numbers of school librarians, community wardens and early years staff and to the provision of music tuition and outreach in some of the most deprived communities in the country.

I have listened to members on the Government benches during the past few weeks, and it is clear that they have disengaged with the fact that local government is in crisis. Local government budgets have been eroded—squeezed until the pips squeak—year after year by SNP and Green ministers. The consequences of that can be seen from the failure to close the poverty-related attainment gap to the pot-holes in our road.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

What I am inferring—and what I think the member is implying—is that there has to be strategic realignment of funding priorities in Government to give local government more money. That would necessitate significant reductions elsewhere. We have a budget process to go through next year and in subsequent years, so does Mr Cole-Hamilton have a place from which he wants to take that money?

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I told you exactly where I would take that money from; for a start, I would get rid of the vast and unnecessary bureaucracy that is the ministerial takeover of social care.

I point the Government to its own words. In its local elections manifesto, it said that it would

“improve and protect your local services”

and give local councils

“greater control and influence over decisions”.

The SNP promised those things last May, and the Greens were at it, too. They promised

“fair funding for public services”

and

“devolved decision-making”.

Those were the words of the Greens.

It took only 26 days after making big promises at those council elections last May for Kate Forbes and her Green colleagues to unveil their plans for more savage cuts in the spending review.

Last month, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills introduced a fresh sanctions regime for local government. If it did not do what the SNP-Green Government ordered, it would face penalties. The education secretary is treating councils like an enemy that is determined to cut teacher numbers. That is nobody’s wish; nobody is talking about that as a way forward. The way to protect teacher numbers is to adequately fund our local authorities.

The pattern goes back to 2007, which we can see from a recently released cabinet paper showing that John Swinney threatened to

“centralise the delivery of school education ... to play hardball with Cosla”.

None of that demonstrates the collaboration and partnership that we were promised. It puts local government and education in a headlock.

The Greens should listen to Andy Wightman—their former, respected member—who wrote in

Holyrood

magazine last month:

“The Scottish Government’s enfeebling of local councils is an attack on democracy.”

He also, rightly, suggested that we imagine that the boot were on the other foot and that the UK Government threatened financial penalties if Scottish ministers did not follow the Tory Government’s manifesto.

Local authorities need a fair deal from the Government and a power surge that recognises the importance of the work that they do. That means giving them more powers over economic development, planning and transport and ending the SNP power grabs that I have defined. They need new hope and not another ministerial takeover of social care, with a vast and unnecessary bureaucracy that would asset strip and trample over services once again.

Let me turn to council tax reform. Tom Arthur said that that is a key priority, but we know what that means. Like other key priorities before it, the SNP will make no reforms throughout the entirety of this parliamentary session; it has made it explicit that nothing will be rolled out before 2026. The Greens still cannot see that they have gone into Government on the promise of talks about talks—a working group, then a citizens’ assembly—and that, at the end of all that, we are being promised options. Tom Arthur says that those options could be anything from relatively minor to significant and fundamental—talk about kicking something into the long grass. Members do not have to take my word for it; Robin Harper, the former leader of the Greens, agrees.

There is no escaping the harm that this local government settlement will deliver to communities in every corner of Scotland, and the Liberal Democrats will oppose it this evening.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I thank colleagues for their contributions. On Alex Cole-Hamilton’s final remark, I appreciate that he might disagree with the distribution and the allocation but, if he wants to distribute money to local authorities, he needs to vote for the order, or at least not oppose it.

Secondly, if I recall correctly—I will check the

Official Report

—he said that I had been explicit or made clear that there would be no changes to council tax by the end of this parliamentary session. That is not what I said. I gave a specific commitment that was misreported—or, at least, reported with a particular tone that suggested that my intention was other than what it was. I want to be clear about this: my intention is that the pace with which we move on council tax reform will be determined by the outcome of engagement with COSLA and through a deliberative process. I think that members will recognise that, in the spirit of working in partnership with local authorities and respecting them, we should not seek to impose a form of local taxation on them but should, instead, seek to reach agreement and consensus in partnership.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

If I have misrepresented the minister, I apologise. Will he clarify for the chamber—I will correct the record if this is the case—whether council tax will be reformed by the end of this session of Parliament? Yes or no?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

If the member had listened to what I was saying before he intervened, he would understand that the pace of council tax reform is not a matter for Government or this Parliament alone; it is about reaching consensus and agreement with local government and communities, through a deliberative process. Mr Cole-Hamilton might think that the job of the Parliament is to impose a form of local taxation on local government, but we respect local government and will work with it in partnership to ensure that we deliver a kind of reform for which there is consensus.

Mr Briggs touched on the issue of Ukraine. I agree whole-heartedly with him that Russia’s illegal and barbaric invasion has had a significant impact on not only the Scottish and UK economy but the global economy. I recognise that other members take that view, too. However, I note that, when my colleague Jenny Gilruth was highlighting the need for the reconsideration of timetables around the dualling of the arterial trunk roads—clearly a major capital project—and cited the war in Ukraine as one of a range of reasons for that, one of Mr Briggs’s colleagues said that she had a nerve to blame Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. It is important that, if we are going to be adducing the invasion of Ukraine and the impact that it has had on the global economy as a consideration in relation to the UK Government’s funding of the Scottish Government, which has knock-on effects for our capacity to fund public services in Scotland, we have to apply that approach with some consistency.

We are in straitened financial circumstances. We have seen inflation at rates that are certainly unprecedented in my lifetime. This is not an ideal circumstance in which to be delivering a budget, but we have set out key priorities around the just transition to net zero, sustainable public services and the eradication of child poverty. What this local government finance settlement does is provide a real-terms increase to local government for the next financial year. However, I reiterate the point that I have made to Alex Cole-Hamilton and others: if there is a desire for a significant and strategic shift in the Scottish budget to significantly increase the resources that are available to local government, it is incumbent on members to identify where that resource should come from. We can go round in circles every year in these debates, but unless there is a willingness to engage—

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

Will the member take an intervention?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I am afraid that I am out of time, Mr Briggs.

I am happy to have those conversations, but they have to be serious, grown-up conversations. If we are talking about a strategic shift in how the budget is deployed, it is incumbent on members to engage with that seriously.

Again, in the interests of local government and the provision of fiscal stability, I urge members to support the resolution this evening.

Deposit Return Scheme

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a statement by Lorna Slater on an update on Scotland’s deposit return scheme. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I welcome the opportunity to update the chamber on Scotland’s deposit return scheme.

There was a time, not that long ago, when I could have said that every party in this chamber backed a deposit return scheme. There was a time when we were all united in our determination to tackle the litter that blights our streets, parks and beaches. DRS will increase recycling rates from 50 per cent to 90 per cent and cut litter by a third, and there was a time when that was the clinching argument. In 2020, this Parliament—with cross-party support—backed Scotland’s deposit return scheme. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Excuse me, minister.

At the beginning of this item of business, I said that

there should be no interventions or interruptions. There will be an opportunity to put questions to the minister at the end her statement. Until that point, I would be grateful if we could conduct our business in a courteous manner.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I wish that I were able to say that the scheme that we will launch in August

is innovative, groundbreaking and world leading, but t

he truth is that Scotland is following the example of other countries such as Germany and Denmark, as well as regional schemes such as the ones in Canada. That means that we can look abroad and see that the concept works. The lack of uniqueness is the reassurance that it works, and the fact we are not first tells us that we are not taking unnecessary risks.

I am delighted to say that, as of this morning, 664 drink producers—representing more than 90 per cent of the total volume of drinks containers sold in Scotland each year—have completed registration with Circularity Scotland for Scotland’s deposit return scheme. The Scottish Parliament set industry a challenge to take responsibility for the waste that it produces and to play its part in tackling the climate emergency. I am delighted that so many producers have already risen to that challenge.

I understand that there are still concerns among producers, particularly the

smallest companies that are affected by the scheme. We understand those concerns, and I have consistently said that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency will take a flexible approach where possible. It is important that the producers that have not yet registered know that SEPA will be pragmatic in its approach. That means that producers can continue to register even now, after yesterday’s deadline.

Today, we move to the next stage of registration, with Circularity Scotland’s announcement of the launch of registration for return-point operators—the corner shops, supermarkets and other outlets where customers can return empty containers and reclaim their deposits. As Parliament knows, in response to industry feedback, we previously updated guidance and support to make it clearer, easier and quicker for retailers who wish to apply for an exemption to operating a return point.

I know that concerns remain about the scheme, particularly from smaller businesses, and we have been systematically working to resolve those real concerns. For example, in a package of help that is worth £22 million, Circularity Scotland has removed the day 1 and month 1 charges for all producers, up to a threshold of 3 million units per year. Above the 3 million unit threshold, the day 1 payments for producers that are using United Kingdom-wide barcodes has previously been reduced by two thirds. In addition, Circularity Scotland is providing two-month credit terms on deposits and fees, up to the same volume threshold, to reduce the working-capital impact on all producers.

I pledge today that we will continue to listen, which is why I confirm

that my officials will work at pace to explore any further feasible, fair and legal options that are available to support all producers to comply with the scheme, including the potential to have a grace period if needed.

Introducing any form of grace period raises questions, which must be fully explored, about how it would work operationally, fairly and legally for businesses and communities. There are questions about definitions, registration and enforcement, which must all be worked through. While that consideration is being given, it is still essential that all producers register for the scheme, if they have not already done so.

I turn to the exclusion in relation to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020. For weeks, we have been addressing legitimate concerns that producers and retailers have raised with us. Many good-faith critiques, suggestions and proposals have been made, including by some parties in this chamber.

However, others have not acted in good faith. Some have sought to exploit the real concerns among producers, and some have sought—unfortunately, with some success—to turn the scheme into a political wedge issue, using misinformation and deception.

With that in mind, I turn to the claim that the Scottish Government has not sought an exemption from the internal market act. Alister Jack, the Secretary of State for Scotland, told the House of Commons on 22 February—just one week ago today--that

“we have not been asked for an exemption for this under the rules of the UK Internal Market Act 2020 by the Scottish Government—no request for an exemption has come.”—[

Official Report

,

House of Commons,

22 February 2023; Vol 728; c 215.]

That is not true; the Scottish Government has sought that exemption since July 2021. It was discussed in the November 2022 interministerial group meeting, in official-level meetings and at a ministerial meeting in January 2023.

Despite that, so serious was the continued failure of the UK Government to come to a decision on the IMA exemption, the issue was escalated to the Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, in January. He wrote to the UK Government in the clearest terms. He said:

“I am seeking your assurance now that UK Ministers will expedite a rapid solution, including an exclusion to the IMA if that is required”.

I have to be straight with the chamber: for the Secretary of State for Scotland to now claim that no such request has been made is not true. Indeed, the reply to John Swinney from the Treasury is explicit in saying that the UK Government is working on that very question. Therefore, Alister Jack has to answer a simple question: if we had never asked for an exclusion, why did the UK Treasury say that work was already under way?

His claims are simply not true; his story is shifting and changing with every telling. First, we had not asked; then we had not “formally” asked; and then it was not a “ministerial request”. It is all nonsense.

The scheme will go live in August, and I can say that with confidence because people have voted with their feet. Producers have registered, and I am both grateful to them for doing so and proud that Scottish businesses are rising to the challenge. They saw their legitimate concerns addressed by the Scottish Government and they decided whether to take part in the scheme. They have done so because the overwhelming majority recognise their responsibility. They do not want litter on our streets, parks and beaches either, and they recognise that the DRS is the way to end that blight.

However, their decision poses a challenge for those in this chamber who have joined the Alister Jacks of this world in their misinformation. I hear them say that they are pro-business. Well, business is on board. I hear them say that they are worried about jobs. Well, the scheme will create more than 500 jobs. I hear them say that they are concerned about investment. The DRS will see £300 million invested by the private sector in ending the blight of litter on our streets. I say to those members that, if they want to prove that they are in favour of business, investment and jobs, they should get behind the scheme now.

The choice is stark: on the one hand, we have this Scottish Parliament using its devolved powers to tackle the scourge of litter on our streets; on the other, we have Alister Jack attempting to sabotage the scheme as part of his effort to undermine devolution and Scottish democracy. It is time for them to choose where they stand. I can tell members where this Government stands. The question for the other parties is, where do they stand now?

I invite members to welcome the work by Circularity Scotland and producers, who have given an overwhelming vote of confidence in the scheme, and to recognise the work the we have undertaken in relation to the UK Internal Market Act 2020; the confirmation that SEPA will continue to work pragmatically with Circularity Scotland and producers beyond the 1 March to support businesses with compliance before the go-live date; and the commitment to look at further options that are available to support all producers to comply with the scheme, including the potential to have a grace period if needed.

The Presiding Officer

The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would be grateful if all members who wish to ask a question were to press their request-to-speak button now.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Presiding Officer, I wonder whether you would accept a motion without notice under rule 8.14.3 of standing orders to extend the period for questions under this item of business to allow all members who wish to question the minister on the statement to take part.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Golden for his request. Parliament agreed yesterday to include the statement. I am not minded to accept a motion without notice, but I will do my very best to ensure that we take as many members’ questions as possible.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement.

The scheme has been falling apart for months. Even the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy says that it will cause “economic carnage”. Now, the Scottish Government is trying to pick a fight with the UK Government, which has confirmed to me in the past hour that no official request for an internal market act exemption has been received. This is a desperate attempt to shift blame for a home-made shambles.

Small producers are appalled by the scheme’s roll-out and have not registered, which is why the Scottish Government has been forced to consider introducing a grace period. It is too late to make such fundamental changes to the scheme without creating even more complexity, confusion and cost. Now, registration is to remain open. So much for the deadline that effectively forced some producers to sign up, feeling as though a gun was at their head because they would be unable to trade otherwise.

The bottom line is that producer registration has been a disaster. The minister is desperately spinning the sign-up numbers, but in reality it works out that barely 16 per cent of the total number of producers have signed up. That is 664 out of the 4,000 producers that are operating in Scotland. It is no wonder: the legal advice that a number of companies took said that they should not do so. Why sign a blank cheque to Circularity Scotland at this point?

I have a simple question. Does the minister accept that more than 80 per cent of producers have not signed up to the scheme?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

As of today, producers that are responsible for more than 2 billion drinks containers have signed up with Circularity Scotland. That represents the full range of drinks producers from global brands to small craft breweries and distilleries. That means that more than 90 per cent of the total volume of products annually—that is, 90 per cent of what we see on our shelves—is included in the scheme. The scheme has momentum towards the launch on 16 August.

As I have said already, and as I am very happy to say again, SEPA will continue to work pragmatically with Circularity Scotland and those producers that have not registered beyond today’s date to bring them into compliance. I want all those businesses to be able to continue to supply their excellent products into the Scottish market.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

We want there to be a viable deposit return scheme, but today’s statement leaves more questions than answers. The minister said that producers representing more than 90 per cent of the volume of products have signed up. Big producers were always going to sign up. Will she confirm that less than 20 per cent of the total number of producers in Scotland have registered? For the many thousands that have not, because they simply do not know what they are signing up to, up until what point will they be able to register so that they can still sell in Scotland?

The minister, having voted down Labour’s call last week for a delay for small producers, now says that her officials are working at pace to come up with a delay. When will she be able to tell producers whether and when that delay will happen?

The minister said that the Deputy First Minister escalated the call for an opt-out from the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 in January. The Government first set a date for the scheme four years ago, so I hardly think that that is an escalation; it certainly does not show any urgency. What if that opt-out is not granted by August? What is plan B?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

There were several points in that, and I will try to address them all.

On the question of small businesses and those that have not yet registered with Circularity Scotland and SEPA, as I have already said, SEPA will continue to be pragmatic and support those businesses to join the scheme.

I know that every business is different and that each needs its concerns to be addressed specifically to match its business. I encourage every producer that has not yet registered with the scheme to contact Circularity Scotland and SEPA to get the correct advice for its business, so that it can sign up to the scheme and register, and continue to provide its products into the Scottish market from 16 August.

The member asked about the IMA. I will repeat what I have said already: we have sought an exemption since July 2021. This is not new news. The issue was discussed in November 2022 at the interministerial group, at official-level meetings and at a ministerial meeting in January 2023. This is very serious. It was as a result of the UK Government’s continued failure to address this that, as I said before, the matter was escalated to the Deputy First Minister to make sure that a decision is taken in time.

I share the member’s frustration. There is a lack of clarity, which businesses in Scotland really need. However, even without that, businesses that produce

90 per cent of the total volume of products

have sufficient confidence in the scheme to sign on the dotted line. Therefore, we have the momentum that we need to meet the launch on 16 August, and that is what we are continuing to work towards.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Last week in the chamber, I called for the minister to be prepared, with the support of Parliament, to have the space to be pragmatic and flexible, and I appreciate the contents of the announcement today.

Can the minister comment on the significant investment that many businesses have made to date with the full expectation of a go-live date in August? Can she confirm that she informed the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee some weeks ago that there has been long-existing engagement with the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs regarding an exclusion from the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 for Scotland’s deposit return scheme? Does she have any idea why claims that contact with the UK Government is only recent and late are being made? Does she agree that not only is that inaccurate, but it smacks of last-minute political interference from the Scotland Office?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

With regard to the investment, it is estimated that £300 million has been invested by the private sector in Scotland to end the blight of litter on our streets as we have moved towards the scheme. That is a substantial investment, and the scheme will create over 500 jobs. That is a significant contribution to our circular economy.

As I set out in my statement, there is an agreed and published process between the UK Government and devolved Governments for excluding certain areas from the internal market act. We have been following that process for excluding the deposit return scheme regulations from the act, and that has been the subject of discussions with the UK Government for many months. It is disappointing that some UK Government ministers are trying to portray this as recent and late, given the level of productive engagement that we have had with DEFRA and other UK departments on this subject. Yesterday, we took the unusual step of publishing the correspondence with the UK Government, as well as a detailed timeline, to confirm what I have been saying in this chamber. That process is the same one that we went through to protect from the internal market act Scotland’s ban on many single-use plastics, which we passed last year.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The DRS scheme will add up to 40p per container at the point of sale. Can the minister tell the chamber of any investigations that have been done, and any conclusions that have been reached, on the impact that that will have on both inflation and consumer purchase behaviours?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The member will know that, during the committee sessions—way back before 2020 and before these regulations were passed—all the evidence for the business case for the deposit return scheme was looked at in great detail by the committee. I recommend that the member goes back and looks through the record for the detail that he is interested around the business case.

The deposit return scheme, as I set out in my statement, is similar to other schemes around the world. There is precedent for how such a scheme works and is implemented. I am looking forward to Scotland’s scheme going live. When people pay their extra 20p to buy their juice, return their bottle and get that 20p back, they will be doing the right thing not only for the environment but for their communities.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

As the minister said, regulations for a deposit return scheme received cross-party support in 2020. According to research by Zero Waste Scotland, 70 per cent of the Scottish public supported the introduction of a DRS.

Given the context of the on-going climate crisis, does the minister think that the case for the scheme remains as strong now as it was then?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Absolutely. The benefits of a DRS are clear to see. I walk along the streets in Edinburgh all the time and see cans and bottles on the ground and think to myself, “scheme article, scheme article”. That litter will not happen once our scheme is in place.

That is why so many countries around the world have operated similar schemes for years and why the European Union is requiring all its members to have one in place by 2029.

The facts remain clear. Our scheme will reduce littering by a third and increase recycling rates of single-use drinks containers towards 90 per cent. It will reduce CO2

emissions by 4 million tonnes over 25 years, which is the equivalent of taking 83,000 cars off the roads.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

There are two important questions that the minister has not answered. The scheme has registration not by litre but by company. What proportion of all drinks producers, or drinks companies, does the figure of 664 represent, not by output volume but in terms of the total number of producers?

Secondly, although I appreciate that a grace period is being considered, if I were a small drinks producer, I would not know whether this scheme applied to me. When will they know that? When will that work conclude?

Presiding Officer, can I also ask you for one point of guidance? In her statement, the minister referred to parties in the chamber giving descriptions of the scheme that she characterised as being based on “misinformation and deception”. Can you provide guidance on whether you think that that language is parliamentary or not?

The Presiding Officer

Before I pass over to the minister, I will say that the content of contributions is generally a matter for the member concerned, but I remind all members of the need to treat one another with courtesy and respect at all times, including in the language that we use in the chamber.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

On

the member’s point about the grace period, I will repeat what I said earlier. Introducing any form of grace period raises questions that must be fully explored about how that would work operationally, fairly and legally for businesses and communities. There are questions about definitions, registration and enforcement, which must all be worked through. Therefore, while that consideration is being done, it is still essential that producers register for the scheme.

As I have already set out, as of today, producers that are responsible for more than 2 billion drinks containers, which is 90 per cent of the volume of products on the market, have registered. Ninety per cent of what we can see on the shelves today is covered, and we are working pragmatically and practically to bring all the remaining products on board with the scheme, so that they can continue to be sold in Scotland from 16 August, which, of course, is what we all want.

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

Retailers in my island constituency are generally supportive of the scheme, but they want to know who will uplift items and how regularly that will be done. Questions have been put to me about the fact that, in very rural areas, although small shops sell only a relatively small proportion of items in the community compared with supermarkets and online orders, they will end up having to process and store the bulk of all items locally. What more can the Government do to engage with small rural retailers on those points?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Circularity Scotland Ltd, the scheme’s administrator, has, after an extensive tender process, contracted Biffa to manage the collection of DRS material. Biffa, along with Circularity Scotland, is responsible for identifying the needs of individual businesses that will operate as return points in order to ensure that collections are appropriately tailored to each individual business’s needs, no matter where it is in Scotland.

Regarding small retailers, we are continually engaging with businesses of all sizes to ensure that their concerns are addressed. For example, in January, Circularity Scotland announced an increase of 19 per cent in the return handling fees for retailers, following consultation with industry.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

After a torrid few weeks, it is a bold strategy for the minister to come out swinging and to condemn MSPs from across the parties and companies from across the country for raising legitimate concerns. Last night, I was contacted by two producers in Orkney. One is desperately seeking advice on what to do, and the other made it clear that it would not be registering. Given the minister’s and the Government’s recent track record of positing dubious statistics, can the minister please clarify that it is not 90 per cent but less than 20 per cent of producers that have registered?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Again, I will try to touch on all the questions that the member raised. I take the legitimate concerns of small businesses very seriously. That is exactly why we have been working with them on pragmatic measures to ensure that they can fully participate in the scheme. In relation to the businesses that contacted the member, looking for advice, as I said, each business needs advice that is specific to its needs and business model, so I would advise them to contact Circularity Scotland and SEPA directly to get the right advice.

In what I have said, I have been clear that what we have registered with the scheme right now is businesses that represent more than 90 per cent of the annual volume of products. On the shelves in shops around Scotland, 90 per cent of the items are now incorporated into the scheme. That builds significant momentum for the 16 August launch date—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the minister, please.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

We are committing from today to work to bring in the remaining businesses so that all businesses in Scotland can participate.

Willie Coffey (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley)

Can the minister clarify the arrangements for returning cans and bottles for people who have to do their weekly shop online from home, by reason of infirmity or disability that prevents them from returning their recycling materials in person?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

That

is an important question. We will shortly bring forward amendments to the DRS regulations so that only the largest grocery retailers will initially be obliged to provide an online take-back service and all other businesses will be exempt. That is in response to industry concerns about those matters—we have listened to industry. We also plan to phase in the take-back obligations on the largest retailers. Therefore, before amending regulations are introduced, further work will be undertaken to identify how elderly and disabled people who may not be able to get to a physical return point will be protected during the phasing in of take-back. That is to ensure that no one is disadvantaged by the scheme.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The revelations that we have heard this afternoon about the secretary of state are truly shocking. His comments are misleading and he should resign. [

Laughter

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the member, please.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I have more to say.

Three years after the Scottish Parliament approved our deposit return scheme, the UK Government has, in recent months, made tentative suggestions that there will be a separate scheme for England from 2025. Some members immediately called for the Scottish scheme to be dropped so that we could align with a non-existent UK Government scheme. Does the minister agree that that path would have been disastrous for the environment and businesses?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I absolutely agree. The UK Government’s announcement, although welcome, came just seven months before our launch date. To have hit the brakes at that point would have been devastating, given how far we have come and the significant investment that has been made.

In fact, it is positive for the rest of the UK that we are going first in Scotland and developing the solutions. That will facilitate the development of a deposit return scheme for the rest of the UK.

It is also important to understand that the English scheme, unlike our own, the scheme in Wales and many other deposit return schemes around the world will exclude glass. Including glass will deliver significant environmental benefits, so the UK Government’s decision will result in a narrower scheme in England that will be at odds with our scheme and the one that is being developed in Wales.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Today, I was given sight of a letter from a well-known Scottish drinks producer to Circularity Scotland, which highlights the producer’s concerns about the continued lack of clarity on advance payments, particularly given the comments from Scottish National Party leadership candidates, whose views on the scheme all seem to be different from that of the minister. The letter states:

“The methodology is not clear and has not been shared with us, so we do not know how our potential exposure can be calculated”.

The letter goes on to make it clear that the company has signed the producer agreement only because it has been left with no alternative if it wants to still have a Scottish business after 16 August.

Does the minister consider it acceptable that producers are so frustrated by the lack of detail about the scheme that they are prepared to sign up to it only at economic gunpoint?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

As the member will know from a letter that he will have received from Circularity Scotland, Circularity Scotland is a not-for-profit organisation that was established by 27 producers, retailers, wholesalers and trade associations. Circularity Scotland exists to help Scottish businesses to comply with the regulations that were passed by the Parliament.

I am delighted that the business that the member mentioned was able to contact Circularity Scotland to ask for information, and I encourage it to continue to work with Circularity Scotland to get that information and implement the scheme in a way that works for its business.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

My constituents and I are frustrated at the amount of litter that we see around us in the end east of Glasgow. Glasgow City Council workers cannot possibly pick it all up. A week past Saturday, I took part in a litter pick. Within an hour, I had picked up 17 glass bottles, not to mention a number of cans and plastic bottles.

Can the minister give me an absolute assurance that she will tackle the litter problem through the deposit return scheme?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I can, absolutely, assure the member of that. I share his concerns when I walk down streets and see cans, bottles and broken glass. Such litter is a blight on our streets. From 16 August this year, we will be able to reduce the amount of litter significantly, because those items will no longer be waste—they will be a scheme article that will be worth 20p—so it will be worth picking up such items and returning them to a return point.

Scotland’s deposit return scheme will account for a reduction in litter of about a third, and it will increase recycling rates of cans and bottles from 90 per cent.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The minister has told us that 664 drinks producers have signed up to the scheme. What is the total number of drinks producers in Scotland?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

So far, 664 producers have signed up to the scheme, which, as I said, represents more than 90 per cent of the total volume of businesses.

Members

No!

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the minister.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

What we need to be clear on is that the volume of materials and the significant number of producers that have signed up mean that we now have a viable scheme, with momentum to our 16 August start date, because businesses have committed and signed on the dotted line.

We will continue to work with businesses that have not yet signed up to bring them online—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, members.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

—because we want all Scottish producers to participate in the scheme. As we move towards 16 August, we will work towards getting the figure to 100 per cent of the volume.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

Is the minister aware, and is the permanent secretary aware, of the huge extra costs that must necessarily be incurred by businesses between now and mid-April—being when a new First Minister and Cabinet could halt the scheme?

Businesses have told me today and yesterday that, between now and April, those extra costs will amount to £15 million for convenience stores and between £10 million and £20 million for hospitality. A leading craft beer and wine online retailer based in Scotland has stated that it will cost it comfortably a six-figure sum in the next six weeks, which will all be wasted if the scheme is halted in April.

Will the minister therefore avoid that wasted expense by calling a halt now, saving massive costs by doing so? If not, is she trying to protect the interests of Biffa, a company with a dubious environmental record according to a report in

Scotland on Sunday

last Sunday, and those of other large companies? Is she the great friend of the biggest business and the enemy of Scotland’s small businesses?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The position of the Scottish Government is that the scheme will launch on 16 August. The member has outlined why that must be so: because businesses in Scotland have invested about £300 million toward its launch. Those businesses that have made that investment will get the return on that investment—their return handling fees—when the 20 pences start flowing. No one with any credibility speaking for industry would be considering a delay. We need those 20 pences to start flowing so that the investment is well made.

We know that businesses are on board with the scheme, and a critical mass of businesses have signed up to the scheme to deliver it. Those producers are taking responsibility and are responding to the challenge that the Parliament has set them. Will they step up and play their part in responding to the climate emergency? They have signed on the dotted line and have said that they will. The scheme will create more than 500 jobs. Those who are concerned about investment in jobs need to back the scheme and back its launch on 16 August.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Is the number that the minister is not prepared to give Parliament 84 per cent—84 per cent of producers have not signed up to her disastrous scheme?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The member is misunderstanding what makes the scheme viable and what builds momentum. [

Laughter

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members, can we please conduct ourselves in a courteous manner?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Who contributes to the deposit return scheme is based on proportionality; therefore, the largest producers contribute most to the scheme. Having the largest producers on board builds the momentum that we need towards the 16 August deadline. That is why today’s announcement is excellent news.

We will continue to work to bring on board all those small businesses. We all agree that we want those small businesses to be fully on board with the scheme so that they can continue to trade from 16 August. I have said it over and over again, and members may not be hearing it, but we are working with those small businesses to bring them on board.

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

I will quote a business in my constituency. It has said:

“We have not signed the contract with Circularity Scotland. Our solicitors said we would be at risk of being derelict in our duties as directors as we would be signing a contract without due care. We have not been given terms and conditions and have not been given any costs from SEPA or Circularity Scotland.”

Would the minister comment, please?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Yes—I am happy to comment.

As of today, 664 businesses have signed up. That represents the full range of drinks producers, from global brands to small craft breweries and distilleries. Those 664 businesses have confidence in the scheme and confidence in the agreement. I would absolutely recommend that any producer that has questions about the agreement work through them with Circularity Scotland, which is more than happy to answer any questions and to go through the detail with them.

The Presiding Officer

There are three members remaining who wish to ask a question. If questions and responses can be brief, we will have time.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I am interested in what we have learned from other countries. My understanding is that 45 other countries have taken forward a DRS.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I thank Emma Harper very much for that question.

The Scottish Government and other organisations engaged with countries that operate deposit return schemes through the design, business case development and consultation processes for Scotland’s DRS, including Sweden, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Germany. It also engaged with organisations that have broad expertise in international deposit return schemes, such as Reloop. Circularity Scotland is maintaining engagement with other schemes around the world.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I hope that the minister will reflect on her performance today, because the fact is that more than 80 per cent of companies have not signed up to her scheme. I have met many of them—they include our constituents here, in Lothian, who have been desperate to get meetings with the minister but have been ignored. They are small businesses. They are people who are having sleepless nights over the scheme, and they are people who believe that it could drive their business to the wall. Therefore, will the minister reflect on that, and will she also apologise to those businesses?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

I very much hope that businesses will actually be reassured by today’s announcement that the scheme has the confidence of their colleagues and competitors, and that they will, if they wish to continue to trade in Scotland, engage with the Circularity Scotland and SEPA in order to participate fully. As I have said—I hope that this will prevent sleepless nights—we will allow producers to continue to register with the scheme. I encourage them to do so, so that they can continue to trade in Scotland.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The minister might not want to listen to the Opposition parties or to candidates for the SNP leadership, but she needs to listen to the voices of Scottish business. In response to her statement, Scottish Chambers of Commerce has just said:

“The Ministerial Statement on the Deposit Return Scheme has completely ignored concerns from Scottish firms. Our call was to pause the scheme and redesign it with the business community and that call has been rejected by the Minister.

It’s been clear to the business community for some time that operating this poorly designed scheme in its current form is impossible and is adding unnecessary cost pressures on businesses.”

Why is the minister not listening?

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Today’s announcement that 90 per cent of the volume of products are registered with the scheme is a significant milestone for the scheme. It means that the scheme is viable to go live on 16 August this year.

I speak to business all the time. Yesterday, when I was speaking to producers that are looking at finishing their registration with the scheme, they were saying to me, “The one thing we need from you, minister, is to make sure this scheme goes live on 16 August. That is what we need from you—a commitment to that date—so that, when we sign on the bottom line, we know what we’re signing up to.” That is absolutely what I am committing to—what businesses have asked of me, which is to go live on 16 August.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I will raise a point of order, of which notice was given to your office.

With regard to standing orders as a whole, particularly under chapter 14, on laying and publication of documents, and also having regard to the clearly defined duties that are incumbent on the permanent secretary as the accountable officer as prescribed in the “Scottish Public Finance Manual”, annex 1, paragraph 2, may I ask whether there are any means by which the permanent secretary can be called here to make a statement and to answer questions from MSPs from all parties who have serious concerns with regard to the duties?

As the accountable officer, the permanent secretary has a specific duty. Where any one of the four tests of regularity, propriety, value for money and feasibility are breached, he must—he must—seek from Scottish Government ministers a ministerial direction.

On 15 February, my MSP colleagues Maurice Golden, Claire Baker and Liam McArthur and I wrote to the permanent secretary, asking that he seek a ministerial direction in respect of the Scottish Government’s deposit return scheme and the plan to implement it in August. A fortnight ago, out of courtesy, we provided him with that letter in private, with a fair opportunity to reply to our request for a meeting to discuss the matter. I have had no such reply. This morning, as is only courteous, I notified the Presiding Officer that I would make a point of order regarding the permanent secretary today.

The scheme might decimate small producers; hike beverage costs—as even the chief of CSL admits; damage the environment with millions of extra car miles and a reduction in the amount of glass that is recycled for bottles, which will go to landfill instead; penalise local authorities; and cause massive job losses in small businesses, whose life’s work will be ruined.

Therefore, I ask this. Is the Permanent Secretary, who, it is reported, earns a starting salary of up to £180,000 a year, going to come here to explain whether he has sought such a direction? If not, why not? If there is no way, in procedural terms, that he can appear—willingly or otherwise—before a plenary session, can he, in fact, be called the “accountable officer”? In that circumstance, he would, by definition, be unaccountable.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Fergus Ewing for advance notice of his point of order.

The Parliament may require a person to give evidence concerning any subject for which a member of the Scottish Government has general responsibility, but it would be for a relevant committee to consider whether it would seek to use that power.

In respect of plenary sessions, the terms of the Scotland Act 1998 mean that only members of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish law officers may participate in proceedings.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Repeatedly, the minister failed to answer the same, or a similar, question from across the chamber about the total number of producers in Scotland that could sign up to the scheme. We know that 664 have done so. Either the minister and the Scottish Government do not know that figure or the minister has repeatedly refused to give the figure in the chamber this afternoon.

I therefore ask whether you will investigate whether the Scottish Government knows what the figure is? If it does, will you recall the minister to answer the questions that she has refused to answer this afternoon?

The Presiding Officer

I reiterate that the content of a member’s contributions is a matter for the member unless it contravenes standing orders.

Scrutiny is a matter for all members of the chamber, and they may employ all the various mechanisms that are available to them.

At this point, I conclude the item of business. I will allow a moment for members to reorganise themselves before we move on to the next item of business.

Dementia Strategy

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-08053, in the name of Kevin Stewart, on a dementia strategy.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I am very grateful for the opportunity to lead this debate on the progress that we have made in developing a new dementia strategy for Scotland. That includes the running of our national conversation late last year, in which we reached hundreds of individuals, communities and organisations.

We are now able to publish a summary of what people told us and to outline how we are working with our national dementia lived experience panel to develop a new story for dementia policy in Scotland. The story will be one that builds on our world-leading commitments, such as to a minimum of one-year post-diagnostic support and to a policy that is person-centred and that has our communities at its heart.

I know that members across the chamber will be keen to hear about the progress that we have made and to contribute their own views on what we, as a country, should aspire to do to ensure that everyone living with dementia and those who provide them with care and support are enabled to live fulfilling lives and access their choice of care and support where and when they need it.

There are approximately 90,000 people living with dementia in Scotland. We know, on the basis of predicted demographic changes and trends, that that number is likely only to grow, with one in three people born now likely to go on to develop dementia.

Dementia is a neurological condition that is degenerative and that affects cognitive functions, and for which there is currently no cure. Although it is a condition that is most likely to affect older people, it is not exclusive, and more people under the age of 65 are being diagnosed with younger onset dementia.

We know that the effects of this brain disease, as it advances, can be traumatic for people living with the condition, their families and those who provide care and support. That came through strongly in our national conversation. However, it was also emphasised to us that dementia is a condition with which people can live for decades and that they can continue to live well at home as active citizens who contribute to their communities. As a Government, we hope that the debate reflects on the range and diversity of experience of those contributions.

Improving care and support for people living with dementia and those who care for them has been a major ambition of the Scottish Government since 2007. Since then, dementia services have been transformed, thanks to excellent contributions from staff who work across health and social care and the public, third and independent sectors. Those developments have been driven by our three previous dementia strategies and a subsequent Covid-19 action plan, each of which prioritised a continuous journey towards more integrated, person-centred care, as well as the maintenance of a good quality of life for longer for people living with dementia. In addition, we have had a focus on modernising specialist dementia national health service care and, more recently, on supporting the brain health agenda.

Our estimate shows that integration joint boards spent £2.6 billion on dementia in this financial year. That is an increase of around 13 per cent since 2014. In addition, we have provided additional national investment in dementia post-diagnostic support this year and last year, and we have written to local service partners to indicate that additional investment will continue in 2023-24 and beyond, subject to parliamentary approval being received for overall budgets. That allows us to deliver on our world-leading commitment to provide everyone who is diagnosed with dementia in Scotland with a minimum of a year’s post-diagnostic support.

Alongside that, we have invested £1 million over two years, via Age Scotland, to boost and sustain community-led support, such as the support that is provided by the excellent Kirrie Connections meeting centre, which I recently had the pleasure of visiting. We will continue to do vital strategic national work on reforming the health and social care system to make sure that joined-up, person-centred care is available to enable people to live well, in the place that they choose, for as long as possible.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

It is now almost four years exactly since my mother passed away with dementia. The minister has mentioned this point once, and perhaps he will go on to elaborate. Obviously, it is very important that the individual who has dementia is given appropriate care—that is mentioned in the feedback summary that we have received today—but my sister and I did not really know how to deal with my mother’s dementia. In effect, she faded away in front of us; it was a hollowing-out of our much-loved mother.

What I am asking the minister to bear in mind is the fact that families who have family members with dementia need proper professional support, too. I hope that that will be baked into the future strategy.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I said at the beginning that every one of us in the chamber has probably been touched by a family member or friend who has had to live with dementia, which is not easy. In all that we do, we must look not only at those folks who are living with dementia, but at the families and others who care for them. I cannot be clearer than that. I have already said that, and I am sure that that will come out again and again in this afternoon’s debate.

This year, there will be continued investment in social care of £1.7 billion, to address the unprecedented pressures on our health and social care system. That will be used to provide interim care places and to continue to invest in the development of the primary care workforce. All those efforts will benefit people living with dementia and those who provide them with care and support.

However, the Government has the ambition to go further, and we know that that ambition is shared across the chamber and right across Scotland. There was a clear appetite from a broad range of dementia stakeholders for a new strategy that is clear on priorities and expectations, and which demonstrates that we have learned lessons from the pandemic and beyond.

We wanted to attempt a new kind of strategy development, building on the years of dedicated work by lived experience-led groups, such as the Scottish dementia working group, the national dementia carers action network, STAND—striving towards a new day—and Deepness Dementia Media, which have worked to share their experiences and improve policy and practice.

We recognise that people living with dementia, their families and those who provide them with care are experts by experience. That is why the strategy is being co-produced with a national dementia lived experience panel. That panel, which is made up of 11 people living with dementia and 11 care partners, broadens even further the opportunities for the voices of lived experience to be heard in the strategy from its outset and throughout its implementation.

I was delighted to listen to the group’s deliberations at its meeting last week, at which a draft of the strategy was considered. Having witnessed the meaningful co-production taking place between the group and Government, I am confident that the group’s contributions will move us towards a strategy that truly reflects its ambitions.

The initial draft that the group was considering is based on the responses to our national conversation, which ran from September to December last year. Our Government listened to people who told us what their good and bad experiences were and what they wanted to see in a new strategy. Much of that is reflected in today’s publication on what people told us.

I do not have time to reflect on everything that we heard, but I want to mention some things. People told us about the things that mattered to them and kept them well. Positive experiences of receiving support and care, centred around post-diagnostic support and continuity of care, were detailed. That last aspect—continuity—was seen as a key principle that enables trusting relationships to be built between people living with dementia, their families and carers, and professionals.

Communities in all their guises were an incredibly positive aspect of people’s experience of living with dementia. From local music groups to more formal meeting centres and dementia resource centres, community is the foundation stone of good, positive support and helps people to maintain a sense of connection, dignity and control beyond their diagnosis or carer status.

However, we must recognise that, for many, things did not always go the way that they should have. In relation to access to early diagnosis and support, people found that there can be a lack of awareness from professionals of what dementia is and its impacts on people and their families. People’s experiences were often of a healthcare system that was unable to meet their or their family member’s individual needs and preferences.

There is an urgent need to change societal attitudes towards people living with dementia and those who provide them with care and support. Dementia must no longer be seen as purely a death sentence, or something for people to suffer through. We heard that such attitudes make people who are living with dementia feel that they are no longer valued members of their community and that they cannot aspire to live fulfilling lives.

I will provide more detail on how we will go forward in my closing speech, but we are clear that delivering on the ambition that has been set out in our engagement will require a long-term vision and shared responsibility for delivery, which will be set out in a new strategy. That will be supplemented by clear, short-term deliverables that will be set out in subsequent delivery plans that will be agreed by the end of this year.

I look forward to a considered debate that will be personal to a number of folks in the chamber, on a topic that matters a great deal to so many and that includes the question of how we get the balance right between making the long-term change that our communities believe is needed and continuing to do right by people in the here and now.

If I may, Presiding Officer, I will end my speech with a voice of lived experience—in this case, that of a member of our national dementia lived experience panel, who said:

“Dementia is an unexpected crossroads in the highway of life. It doesn’t necessarily mean the end.”

I move,

That the Parliament welcomes the holding of a National Conversation to inform a New Dementia Strategy for Scotland in late 2022; recognises the key themes that have emerged from this National Conversation, including the need to change how dementia is talked about; supports the Scottish Government’s commitment to challenge stigma and promote and protect the rights of people with dementia as valued citizens of Scotland, to value the importance of grassroots community projects to individuals, families and local communities, and to build on Scotland’s world-leading commitment to post-diagnostic support to ensure that all people with dementia have the opportunity to benefit from it; supports the need for a long-term vision and set of priorities to improve the experiences and quality of support and services for people living with dementia and those who provide them with care and support; recognises the value of established lived experience groups, and welcomes action by the Scottish Government to build on this and work with the National Dementia Lived Experience Panel and other key stakeholders to develop a new Dementia Strategy for Scotland.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Dementia is the on-going decline of brain functioning, typically presenting as memory loss, the slowing of thinking speed, the loss of mental sharpness and the mixing up of words. Dementia often leads to trouble with speech, low mood, anger and difficulty with carrying out basic daily activities.

The most common type of dementia is Alzheimer’s disease, which is progressive, with symptoms developing gradually over many years until eventually they become severe. Symptoms include: personality changes, such as someone becoming aggressive, demanding and suspicious of others; hallucinations and delusions; and low mood and anxiety. Partners, family and friends can all become strangers.

All too often, close family members sacrifice their own wellbeing to ensure that a loved one gets the best care that they can give. As a general practitioner, I often hear about changing roles in relationships, such as children having to become the parents and take responsibility for financial matters, or a partner having to be the main carer. It can all be quite overwhelming, as Stephen Kerr highlighted when he talked about his mother.

As we get older and our health changes, it is really worth considering setting up continuing and welfare powers of attorney. That involves having a conversation with loved ones about their needs and wishes, because it can be difficult to do that once there is a diagnosis of dementia.

According to Public Health Scotland, as of 2015, up to 90,000 people in Scotland were affected by dementia, of whom around 3,000 were under the age of 65. The number of people dying with dementia is rising. Fifteen years ago, there were 3,200 deaths but the number has doubled in just a decade. Marie Curie expects that, by 2040, dementia will be the main underlying cause of death, with 19,200 deaths per annum—a threefold increase in 17 years.

I think that all members can agree that we need a more robust dementia strategy in place, with actions and measurable outcomes, and that that should be a priority for Government. Dementia policy cannot be tinkered with.

I also think that we can all support the principle that people who are living with dementia must be supported to live their lives as they want to live them, for as long as they can do so, and that, when they approach the end of life, they should have access to the most appropriate care, advice and support. Access to palliative and end-of-life support should be a significant component of our dementia strategy.

A key priority of the Scottish National Party Scottish Government’s previous dementia strategy was the extension of access to post-diagnostic support. However, delivery was poor. Fewer than half the people who were newly diagnosed with dementia were offered post-diagnosis support. The Western Isles had the worst rate, at 28.5 per cent.

The SNP Government also announced that the management of an individual’s care and support would sit in primary care and be led by a dementia link worker, so that people would receive timely aid. Then it cut £65 million from the primary care budget. The SNP has been in charge of primary care services for 15 years, but 42 per cent of GP practices report that demand substantially exceeds capacity, and 34 per cent of practices have at least one GP vacancy. The British Medical Association estimates that Scotland is short of 312 full-time-equivalent GPs, and, according to the Auditor General for Scotland, the SNP is nowhere near on track to increase the GP headcount by 800 by 2027.

That is the SNP in action: big on announcements, light on delivery. The SNP-Green Government has cut £70 million from social care—services that offer crucial support to those suffering from dementia.

Whoever is health secretary or in the minister’s chair after 27 March must get real. Failures in the context of primary care, delayed discharge and social care have all had severe consequences for the quality of the care on which people with dementia and their families rely.

We need to find solutions. That entails political decisions about policy and resources. Platitudes will not wash, and nor will self-congratulatory statements from those on the Government benches.

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

I hope that Sandesh Gulhane appreciates that all politicians in this Parliament will get real. We have just concluded a budget process in which lots of parties made demands. Dementia is a personal issue for me, as it is for Stephen Kerr. It is not enough to express platitudes from the Opposition benches about how things should be better on a substantial matter that is personal to all of us, without saying where one penny would come from. I find that profoundly disrespectful to people who have died from or who are living with dementia and their families.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

The national care service would be a great place to start. One of the SNP’s leadership candidates is making promises about money that he is going to find from I do not know where.

At least now, the SNP looks set to bin its widely criticised national care service plan, as we have just heard, and the associated £1.7 billion spend. Despite rigorous defences of the SNP’s flagship policy from members around the chamber and members on the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, the SNP leadership candidates are retreating from that position and leaving other SNP members exposed and fleeing for cover. Humza Yousaf says that he will overhaul the plan, despite defending the policy many months ago. Kate Forbes says that Scotland may not need the flagship policy at all, and she is the finance secretary. Ash Regan would immediately pause the plan if she leads SNP members and becomes our First Minister.

Perhaps Bob Doris should think about that and reflect on it in his speech. It seems that the ministers in the chamber today are the only ones who are staking their political reputations on the policy—or have they U-turned, too?

This year, more than 6,000 Scots will die with dementia, and, in under 20 years, the number of deaths will rise to more than 19,000. We need to do better to support people now and act to ensure that Scotland can support many more people with dementia tomorrow. We look forward to taking that forward with whoever has the job come the end of the month.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am a practising national health service doctor.

I move amendment S6M-08053.1, to insert at end:

“; recognises that improvements in social care, primary care and delayed discharge would make a huge improvement to the quality of life of people with dementia, and calls on the Scottish Government to make these improvements at pace.”

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I am sure that most, if not all, members in the chamber have been impacted by dementia in some way. When I was a student, I worked in a care home as an activities organiser. I know that colleagues will struggle to see me as the home’s redcoat, but in many ways that allowed me to get a better understanding of people living with dementia, and to build relationships with their families and understand something of the illness and the support that is required to ensure that we work hand-in-hand with families to deliver the care and support that is needed.

It is estimated that 90,000 people in Scotland live with dementia. As we heard, new research from Marie Curie estimates that the number of people dying with dementia as the primary underlying cause of death will rise by almost 200 per cent by 2040.

I begin with the areas of consensus that exist in the debate. Our public health approach to dementia must recognise and respond to the increasing prevalence of dementia across society. That is why that we, in the Labour Party, believe that it is imperative that we have a person-centred approach to dementia that focuses our energies on empowering people with dementia to continue to live fulfilling lives with access to additional care and support when they need it.

Any strategy for dementia must, first and foremost, recognise that people who live with dementia are human beings just like you and me. They have social needs and are supported by their loved ones, who, as we have heard from members, are often struggling in their own ways to cope and find the space to deal with the illness. We must explore how we make our communities more dementia inclusive and dementia friendly, so that people with dementia can live at home for as long as they are able to do so. We support the work of the dementia-friendly communities network, which brings together hundreds of dementia-friendly communities that have made meaningful changes to local villages and towns across Scotland to create inclusive spaces for people with dementia.

When the Government launched its national conversation on a new dementia strategy for Scotland, last autumn, we welcomed that development, and we take seriously the responses of people with lived experience, clinicians, third sector organisations and the family carers whom I have spoken about.

What is clear from the conversation is that people who live with dementia and their families need to see action. They need to see tangible signs of progress from the Government, because national conversations become devalued unless they result in substantially improved outcomes for patients. We have had a national conversation, but have we really been listening to what has been said? Despite encouraging rhetoric, the Government’s delivery record has been less than impressive.

The SNP has been in power for 15 years and the first dementia strategy was published 13 years ago, yet people with dementia and their families still face a postcode lottery for diagnosis and post-diagnostic support. The most recent statistics, which are from 2019-20, show that only 42 per cent of people who are newly diagnosed with dementia are referred for post-diagnostic support. Indeed, during the pandemic, people with dementia and their families were at the centre of that maelstrom and they did not receive support in their lives often enough. In some ways, that reflects the Government’s failure to learn lessons since the implementation of the first national dementia strategy, in 2010.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I recognise what Mr O’Kane said about accessing post-diagnostic support in certain places. The Government has put in an extra £3.5 million per annum to ensure that folk get the support that they need. Beyond that, our proposals on national quality standards should get rid of the postcode lottery that he mentioned. I recognise that it is not good enough that in some places people get very good help and support while folk who are not that far away from them do not.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I recognise what the minister said about that investment, but I think that it is fair to say that that money was the restoration of previous cuts. Also, we have already heard about the various flavours of a national care service, so we are not sure what the future of the bill will be or how it will address the postcode lottery in the way that the minister suggested. We are in a wait-and-see situation right now. The reality is that, no matter how well intentioned the dementia strategy is, it cannot and will not succeed in achieving its aims until the Government gets serious about tackling the systemic issues in the NHS and social care.

That is why Scottish Labour has been calling on the Government to end the indignity for dementia patients who are stuck in hospital when they could be back living in their house or care home. That issue could be resolved if the Scottish Government took the necessary action to increase the availability of care packages. At present, provision is patchy and access to suitable packages depends on where someone lives. All members’ inboxes show examples of people who are in real need, so we need real action.

The SNP promised to scrap non-residential care charges in its manifesto, as recommended by the independent review on adult social care, and it is time that it took action and delivered on that commitment.

The Scottish Government must deliver for the social care workforce, because it is the backbone of ensuring that people get the care provision that they need. We have consistently called for an immediate pay rise to £12 per hour, rising to £15 per hour. If we are serious about rewarding the workforce and increasing staff retention, we have to make that move. Week after week, the minister has derided calls from those on the Labour benches for £12 per hour, rising to £15 per hour, for social care workers, claiming that it was unreasonable and unaffordable, yet this afternoon in the

Daily Record,

his colleague Kate Forbes, the finance secretary, stated her commitment to deliver as First Minister what she steadfastly opposed and refused to introduce as finance secretary: £15 per hour for social care workers. It is amazing what U-turns can be performed when there is an SNP membership to be won over. Given the Government’s track record on delivery, I will not be holding my breath.

The challenge for the Government is that it needs to close the gap between the rhetoric and what is delivered to ensure that people living with dementia and their families and carers have an improved quality of life. It is time for the Scottish Government to get serious about delivering for people with dementia, and that starts by fixing the omnicrisis in the NHS and social care.

I move amendment to motion S6M-08053.1, to insert at end

“; regrets that the current NHS workforce challenges are impacting on dementia care, with timely access to diagnosis and post-diagnostic support becoming a postcode lottery, and calls on the Scottish Government to publish a plan for ending the high level of delayed discharge among dementia patients, and to improve support for people with dementia by removing non-residential social care charges and increasing the availability of care packages, supported by efforts to grow the social care workforce by delivering an immediate increase in pay to at least £12 per hour, and a plan to increase pay to £15 per hour by the end of the current parliamentary session.”

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am pleased to speak for the Liberal Democrats in this important debate. As we have heard, dementia is a devastating and often tragic condition that exacts a particularly cruel toll on those living with it and those who love and care for them. It is often referred to as the long goodbye. It is the slow disappearance of cherished memory, the gradual loss of the loved one you once knew and their physical, mental and spiritual deterioration into a shell of what they once were. I cannot imagine how painful it must be to visit a brother, sister, parent or grandparent to find that they no longer recognise who you are.

Despite improvements in care and treatment over the years, this devastating illness is not going away. Indeed, it is estimated that, by the year 2025, more than 1 million people in the UK will have a dementia diagnosis and that almost all of us will know somebody who is living with the condition.

As Scotland’s population steadily ages, so, too, will the number of dementia sufferers grow. As the number of dementia sufferers rises, a renewed focus and a commitment to sustained funding are essential. Therefore, I would like to turn to the Government’s dementia strategy.

It is right that the Government has reached out to those with experience of the condition in order to inform its new strategy. Its previous strategy has not been updated since the pandemic, so a renewed focus, which takes account of the impact of the Covid years, is vital. As with every condition, early diagnosis and intervention are critical. The interruption to services that was caused by the pandemic has meant that many people have received a dementia diagnosis much later in their experience of the condition, so their condition is more progressed and their needs more acute at the point of diagnosis than would otherwise have been the case. The Government’s strategy, therefore, needs to recognise the particular and unique challenges that the recently diagnosed cohort will face, and to ensure that they and their families have access to a breadth of support.

Research conducted by Marie Curie has found that, by 2040, 10,000 more people each year will be dying with palliative care needs, and a large proportion of those are expected to be dementia sufferers. I echo Marie Curie’s calls for the Government’s new dementia strategy to include a commitment to support people living with dementia to access the tailored palliative care that they need.

We need to ensure that people are supported to live as they want to for as long as they can—that is dignity. The Government’s strategy must include an improvement in accessible and tailored end-of-life support for people with dementia, with an eye on how the ever-increasing need can be met. That must include care provision in people’s own homes and care homes as well as hospices. The previous dementia strategy included a commitment to improve palliative care, but that must now be backed by a clear and measurable implementation plan.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Does Alex Cole-Hamilton agreed that there must also be respite for families, as it allows those suffering dementia to stay in the home but is also important in terms of the dignity of the families that surround the person and provide most of their supportive care?

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

Absolutely. Martin Whitfield is right to bring the attention of the chamber to the fact that much of the unpaid care force in this country is exploited by the state through the love that they have for their families. They are on their knees and they are in want of a break. Therefore, respite absolutely has to be part of that strategy.

The strategy must also align with and inform the upcoming palliative and end-of-life strategies—

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Will the member take an intervention?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am afraid that Mr Cole-Hamilton is in the closing part of his speech.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

The Government’s motion correctly highlights the vital importance of care in our communities. One may wonder, then, why it is intent on disempowering the providers of local care in those communities by creating a vast and unnecessary bureaucracy that represents the ministerial takeover of social care in our country instead of rewarding social care staff with better pay and conditions. The Government should scrap those plans today. SNP leadership hopefuls are seemingly lining up to do exactly that, so there is hope yet that social care staff will get the support that they need now, not five years down the line.

The actress Phyllis Logan, a long-time supporter of dementia charities, said:

“If you find yourself caring for a relative with dementia, the chances are you will need help.”

We must also recognise the toll that this condition takes on the families.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Cole-Hamilton, could you please conclude?