Scottish Parliament, 14 June 2023

295 contributions from 60 members. The official report.

Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good

afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio question time. The first portfolio is wellbeing economy, fair work and energy. Any member who wishes to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.

I advise members that we are very pressed for time across the afternoon, so the usual plea for brevity in questions and responses has an extra significance today as I hope to get in as many questions as possible.

Economically Inactive People (NHS Waiting Lists and Long Covid)

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of the reportedly rising number of people of working age who are economically inactive are inactive as a result of national health service waiting lists or long Covid. (S6O-02357)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Scotland’s labour market continues to perform well, with unemployment at just 3.1 per cent from January to March 2023. Economic inactivity due to illness is a challenge not just in Scotland but across all these islands, and analysis suggests that most people who are now inactive due to long-term sickness were already out of the labour market for another reason. Nonetheless, economic inactivity due to ill health is a key concern for the Scottish Government, and “Scotland’s National Strategy for Economic Transformation” makes a commitment to address Scotland’s labour market inactivity challenges.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

A recent report from the Resolution Foundation has revealed that a greater proportion of Scottish economic inactivity is attributable to health problems than is the case for the rest of the United Kingdom. We know that long Covid has left many key workers, including public sector workers, carers, nurses, doctors and teachers, debilitated and unable to work. Although we can debate the absence of clear clinical pathways and long Covid clinics, will the cabinet secretary agree to investigate why so many public sector workers are losing their jobs, with the consequent loss of their expertise, simply because their employers lack understanding about their condition?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The member raises an important issue, and I would not want anyone to lose their job as a result of their employer not understanding their condition.

I should point out that Salus and working health services Scotland provide return-to-work and occupational health services for people who have health conditions or injuries that are impacting on their work, including long Covid, in order to help them to stay in work. I would hope that all employers, in the private sector or the public sector, are taking advantage of those services to help their employees.

The member has asked me to look into a specific issue, which I am willing to do because I am interested in the point that she makes. I will certainly do that.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

When the COVID-19 Recovery Committee took some evidence on long Covid from sufferers of the condition, one of the issues that they identified was the difficulty that sufferers faced in getting back into the workplace, because of the time that it takes them to get a diagnosis and then a treatment path. They tied that to the absence of long Covid clinics in Scotland.

The First Minister, when he was Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, said that he was open to the notion of long Covid clinics in Scotland. Can the minister give any indication of whether there is going to be any progress from the Government on introducing those vital clinics?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Again, the member raises an important issue. He may wish to ask health ministers about progress on the clinics, because it is up to local health boards to determine how to deliver those kinds of services in their localities.

As he will be aware, the Scottish Government made available around £10 million for long Covid-related issues, so there is some resource being dedicated to the condition.

Again, I note that the member raises a powerful point. I urge him to raise with health ministers the issue regarding progress on long Covid clinics, as it is an important one.

Infrastructure (Impact on Business)

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on what impact poor infrastructure has on the ability of Scottish businesses to succeed. (S6O-02358)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Continuing to deliver high-quality public infrastructure is a priority for the Scottish Government, which is why our policy prospectus committed to targeting capital spend on achieving net zero and maintaining high-quality public infrastructure and services across the country.

Our capital budget for 2023-24 is just over £6 billion. The UK Government’s planned real-terms cuts in our capital funding over the next five years will significantly impact on our capital plans; however, we will do what we can to maximise the funding that is available to support employment, Scottish businesses and the economy through Scotland’s infrastructure investments.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

A new poll has revealed that nine out of 10 people want a full or partial upgrade of the A75 and A77, with 80 per cent of those citing safety fears as their major concern. Nearly half insist that the lack of investment is not only putting tourists off visiting but putting people off moving to the south-west of Scotland.

That comes on the back of an economic investment assessment that highlighted the £5 billion-worth of positive benefit to the economy if proper transport infrastructure was in place. Does the Scottish National Party accept that rural businesses and rural communities are being disproportionately let down through the dire management of Scottish infrastructure?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Th

e member raises the importance of the A75, which I hope is recognised across the chamber; it certainly is by the Scottish Government. The A75 not only is important to Scotland’s economy but provides a critical link between Northern Ireland and the wider markets of the rest of the UK and Europe by connecting the ports to the wider trunk road network.

The member would face the same challenges—if, heaven forbid, his party was ever to be in government—of the financial storms that the Scottish Government has had to cope with in its budgets over the past decade or so, ranging from the banking crisis, the Tory party’s austerity agenda, the impact of the pandemic, Brexit, the cost of living and cost of business crises, the war in Ukraine and so on. The Scottish Government has also had to cope with their impacts on infrastructure projects and the speed at which those can be delivered, and on the budgets that can be made available for those very expensive infrastructure projects. A little bit of realism would benefit the member when he approaches these subjects.

The bottom line is that we agree that the A75 requires work and is a very important trunk road for Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Briefly, Daniel Johnson.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

First I welcome the new tourism minister to his place. Tight labour markets have consequences for infrastructure. I speak to businesses who can identify potential workers, but they cannot travel from where they live to where they need to work. Has the Scottish Government undertaken a critical analysis of key missing transport links and infrastructure that are inhibiting current labour markets?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

O

f course the Scottish Government has transport plans and policies that take into account the need for people to travel to work and the importance of routes around Scotland to allow that to happen. The member raises an important point, because labour shortages and skill shortages are very important; they are undermining some of the sectors in our economy that have demand for their products and services but cannot meet that demand because they cannot find the labour or the appropriate skills.

In some ways, that is a sign of success because they are doing so well, but to capitalise on that success, we need to make sure that people are available for those particular industries and sectors. That important point has to be taken into account by the Scottish Government in relation to transport plans and wider economic policies. However, Brexit is the issue that is most often cited to me as one of the key causes of why many sectors face labour shortages and of the hurdles that people overseas have to jump over to come and work in Scotland, even when they have an employer who is willing to employ them. A range of issues has to be addressed there.

Levelling Up Funding (Islands)

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding levelling up funding for Scotland’s islands. (S6O-02359)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The Scottish Government engages with the UK Government on a regular basis on the implications of its levelling-up policy for Scotland, especially with regard to its impact on devolution. However, the levelling-up fund is a UK Government scheme that circumvents the Scottish Government. Therefore, Scottish ministers have no say in how it is allocated or what projects are supported. Shetland is the only island to have received an award thus far in the Highlands and Islands, demonstrating how poorly the fund has provided support for Scotland’s islands and rural and remote places.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

T

he people of Fair Isle, for whom levelling-up support has been allocated for a new ferry, would perhaps disagree with what the minister just said. They are very much looking forward to having their ageing interisland ferry replaced.

Short tunnels to the north isles could be a better long-term solution, so I wonder whether the minister would seek a meeting with his relevant UK counterpart to discuss levelling-up funding with a view to short tunnels between Shetland’s islands communities.

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The member will be aware that my colleague Neil Gray intends to have much correspondence and many meetings with the UK Government over the future of the levelling-up funds. I will pick up on one point that the member made. My comments were not whatsoever intended to downplay the merits of the Fair Isle award. I was simply making the point that, in the most recent round of funding of a £4.8 billion project, that was the only award for all of the Highlands and Islands.

Apparently, my constituency does not deserve any levelling-up funding, even though, if you look at the economic and social stats, it should qualify for that kind of funding. Many parts of the Highlands would have done so under the European funding, which the levelling-up funding was partly introduced to replicate, but of course the Highlands and Islands were deemed low priority under the UK Government’s criteria, whereas when we were in Europe, they were deemed high priority.

The final point that I will make to the member is that the fund mostly—if not wholly—goes through local government in Scotland, so she might wish to speak to her local authority about its discussions with the UK Government about future rounds of the levelling-up fund. However, I will certainly pass on her point to my colleague Neil Gray to ensure that it is incorporated.

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

Despite previously benefiting enormously from European Union funding, does the minister share my view that the Western Isles received nothing in either round of the levelling up fund? Does he also share my views that the apparent determination of the UK Government to ignore the devolution settlement is unhelpful and that structural funds should be devolved to the Scottish Government as a priority?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The member makes a good point. Originally, the Scottish Government was led to believe that there would be a consequential of £400 million for it to allocate in tandem with Scottish priorities;

then, at the last moment, the UK Government changed its mind and decided to allocate the whole of the fund across the UK according to its own criteria, with the Scottish Government and other devolved Administrations having no meaningful say in the process whatsoever.

Then, there is the idea that the Western Isles should not qualify for the funding—more than £4.8 billion-worth of funding—when I expect that later today members in the chamber will debate the fragility of the Western Isles economy. That fragility is recognised by the Scottish Government and it was recognised by the European Union, but it has not been recognised by the UK Government.

Solar Energy

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

4. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its vision for solar energy. (S6O-02360)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The Scottish Government published a draft vision for the future of solar energy in Scotland as part of our draft energy strategy and just transition plan. The consultation on the plan has now closed and we are reviewing the many responses and the evidence received. We expect to publish the final solar vision by the end of 2023.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The minister will be aware of the repeated calls that have been made for the setting of a stretching but achievable target for solar power, because that is seen as a sine qua non to unlocking the huge potential of solar power in Scotland and to secure the just transition that we all wish to see. Is the minister sympathetic to the calls for the setting of a stretching but achievable target?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Absolutely—I heard those calls and, as I said, solar was a key part of the

energy strategy and just transition draft plan. Through the consultation for that, we invited stakeholders to provide their views on setting a solar deployment ambition and to submit evidence to support them. The consultation is now closed and we are reviewing the responses. By the end of 2023, we are going to provide an updated position on where we see the ambition, and the associated targets will also be set out. To date, 400MW is being generated through solar photovoltaic systems, with 375MW in the pipeline, but I agree that we can do much more.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

We share the minister’s ambition for solar, but it is important that our energy mix and targets are based on evidence and data. At what temperature does the Government’s modelling show that a reduction in solar panel output begins, and as temperatures increase as a result of climate change, what source will provide continuous and constant power to compensate?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

As Liam Kerr knows and as I have said, an energy mix is very important. That is why we invested so much in ScotWind. Wind and solar are compatible, because when the wind blows the sun tends not to shine; the member will know that from living in the north-east.

Members will notice some developments happening in that area. For example, I spoke to representatives of the Scottish Power-owned Whitelee wind farm, which is combining solar panels with the capabilities of its wind farm in recognition of that fact. The member is right that we need to look at the energy mix in the round, but wind and solar are eminently compatible.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

Given the huge opportunities for solar in our urban and rural communities, will the minister consider at least a 4GW target, given the very positive evidence that the cross-party group on energy efficiency and renewables got on that at last night’s meeting

? We need support for existing and new homes, buildings and solar farms, given the biodiversity and rural impacts that they could have across the country.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I absolutely recognise the level of ambition that there is in the solar sector. Solar Energy Scotland has requested that the Scottish Government set a target of 4GW, with an upper target of 6GW, and of course we are looking at that. Scottish Renewables has also called for a target of 1GW on public sector buildings and I think that we have the potential to put solar on a lot of our public buildings.

A lot of local authorities are making that decision right now. My own local authority, Aberdeenshire Council, is providing solar panels for those who live in local authority housing, so there is potential there, working in partnership across local government and the Scottish Government and with our partners in the sector.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 5 was not lodged.

Connectivity (Support for Island Businesses)

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to tourism and other businesses within island communities to mitigate the impact of any connectivity issues affecting them. (S6O-02362)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

We understand the critical interdependence between ferries, the tourism sector and businesses across our islands.

Any scheme for additional support for businesses along the lines suggested by the member needs to be carefully considered and would require stark choices to be made about funding priorities, set against efforts to provide resilience in the network. However, the Scottish Government has already given a commitment to look into this further.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

The Scottish Government

has had plenty time to look into this because the ferry fiasco that our islands now face is not a recent event—it has been happening for some years. Hotels, restaurants, shops, cafes, caravan sites and cycle hire businesses—you name it, even our amazing breweries—are all suffering. They are losing money and they are losing customers right now, so I would like to ask the minister what analysis the Scottish Government has done on what this ferry crisis is costing our island communities. Why will the Scottish Government not commit to the immediate launch of a compensation fund so that those businesses can get back on their feet right now?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Of course, Parliament has an opportunity to debate that topic later today. We do not underestimate in any shape or form the impact of the ferry disruptions on the economies of our islands—particularly, as the member says, the impact on tourism and local businesses. That is why the focus up to now has been on building a resilient ferries network to ensure that we can get to the root of the issue facing the islands and sort it out.

However, as I said, the Government is currently exploring other options to see whether we can offer support, where appropriate, and the First Minister commented on that last week in the chamber.

In the meantime, there are many other ways in which the Scottish Government is supporting the islands, with £26 million to support the national islands plan, including £4.1 million this year, rural rates relief, £50 million through the islands growth deals, and the rural delivery plan that we are committed to. Also, through the R100—reaching 100 per cent—programme, we installed 16 new subsea fibre cables, leading to 15 islands, which is crucial for tourism businesses and other businesses. We are doing a lot to help island economies, but we recognise that there are particular pressures just now.

Renewable Energy Projects (Rural Communities)

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how it is ensuring that rural communities, including Dumfries and Galloway, benefit from current and future renewable energy projects. (S6O-02363)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Community benefits are a well-established, integral part of renewable energy developments in Scotland, enabling all communities to benefit from our vast natural energy resources. Our community and renewable energy scheme—CARES—provides grants and loans that help communities to benefit from the transition to net zero. CARES also provides impartial support and advice about community benefits and shared ownership schemes.

We have commissioned independent research that will help us to ensure that our policies, advice and funding continue to deliver benefits to communities across Scotland. That research is due to report this summer.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Many areas across Scotland benefit from renewable energy projects and some of those projects can lead to the regeneration of derelict areas as well as bringing training opportunities in highly skilled and highly paid jobs to the area for local people.

There is the potential for an offshore development near Luce Bay in the Solway Firth, called SW1. However, one of the challenges in attracting investment in the project is in engaging people regarding the potential benefits for Stranraer and Wigtownshire. Can the minister indicate whether the Scottish Government is doing any work to inform communities about how they could benefit from such energy projects?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The Scottish Government works closely with partners, including Local Energy Scotland, to increase communities’ awareness and understanding of the opportunities that are presented by renewable energy projects, including the potential for shared ownership and community benefits. Our long-standing community and renewable energy scheme provides impartial support and advice as well as funding to communities to help them to make the most of the opportunities and to realise some of the ambitions that they may have. Our good-practice principles clearly set out the need for developers to engage with local communities early and extensively on renewable energy proposals. I have been having positive conversations with various developers about how they can improve their engagement and be inventive with the type of community benefits that they offer, which will have a positive impact on people’s lives. Emma Harper will know that, to date, Dumfries and Galloway has benefited from around £4.6 million in community benefits.

R100 Scottish Broadband Voucher Scheme

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

8. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the uptake in the Western Isles of R100 Scottish broadband voucher scheme vouchers, worth up to £5,000, for properties for which there is no roll-out of superfast broadband planned. (S6O-02364)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The R100 plan involves rolling out superfast broadband to as many properties in the Western Isles as possible. Currently, superfast broadband coverage on the Western Isles stands at 80.5 per cent, up from just 1.3 per cent in 2014. That is largely due to publicly funded investment through Digital Scotland’s superfast broadband programme. The R100 Scottish broadband voucher scheme is demand led and, as yet, no vouchers have been claimed in the Western Isles. However, the R100 team is in advanced talks with commercial operators with a view to them becoming registered suppliers for the Western Isles.

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

A number of my constituents have recently expressed concern that some of the companies that are listed on the R100 website as being active in the Western Isles and, as such, able to utilise the R100 vouchers are declining to undertake the work when approached by interested residents. What more could be done to make it clearer which companies will do the work in the islands so that people can use the vouchers that they are entitled to?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

Alasdair Allan is correct that the situation needs to improve, and quickly. I assure him that advanced talks are under way with a number of suppliers with a view to them becoming registered on R100 schemes. I am confident that those talks will, ultimately, yield a positive outcome for the Western Isles. I assure him that I will keep a close eye on the matter and, at any point, I am happy to discuss with the member the specific obstacles that his constituents are facing to taking advantage of the vouchers. As a Government, we are exploring many other options because, as we all know, technology is moving on quickly. As a relatively new minister for the portfolio, I am keen to understand quickly how we can take advantage of those new technologies for our island communities in Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes portfolio questions on wellbeing economy, fair work and energy.

There will be a brief pause before we move to the next portfolio, to allow front-bench teams to change position.

Finance and Parliamentary Business

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The next portfolio is finance and parliamentary business. If a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question. There is quite a lot of interest in this portfolio, so I appeal for succinct questions and answers.

Budget 2023-24 (Sport and Leisure Facilities)

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact of the 2023-24 budget on the ability of local authorities to keep sport and leisure facilities open to the public. (S6O-02365)

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The Scottish Government places great importance on sport and leisure facilities and believes that everyone should have access to those services. We have increased the resources that are available to local government in 2023-24 by more than £793 million, which is a real-terms increase of £376 million or 3 per cent compared with the 2022-23 budget figures. That does not take away from the challenges that are being faced by all public services in the light of years of austerity, the cost of living crisis and sky-high energy prices. However, it is for local authorities to manage their own budgets and to allocate the total financial resources that are available to them on the basis of local needs and priorities.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

The reduction in local government budgets has forced pools and leisure centres to pass on the increases in their running costs to the clubs and customers who use them. We cannot allow swimming pools to become unaffordable and let involvement in and enthusiasm for Scotland’s highest-participation sports decline.

Recently, the United Kingdom Government announced a £63 million fund specifically to support swimming pools in England. Does the minister recognise the value of swimming pools, and can he tell us what Barnett consequentials are to be made available to local authorities as a result of the UK Government’s spending?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

Local sport leisure facilities including swimming pools play a vital part in supporting the physical and mental health of the nation, and we have repeatedly called on the UK Government to use all the powers at its disposal to tackle the cost of living crisis and provide appropriate energy bill relief to leisure facilities, particularly to indoor water and ice facilities, whose energy costs are absolutely crippling. Therefore, following the UK Government’s announcement of the financial package to support swimming pools in England, we are considering what support can be provided to the sport and leisure sector in Scotland and many local authorities to ensure the longer-term sustainability and energy efficiency of those facilities.

Many leisure facilities and local authorities have taken action to reduce energy costs, but the situation is really challenging, so I call on the UK Government to step up and support leisure facilities, particularly indoor water and ice facilities.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

This morning, the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee heard evidence about swimming pools closing right across Scotland. Vibrant, packed community hubs such as Bucksburn in Aberdeen have shut because the Scottish National Party administration slashed the sports budget.

As we heard, there is money from the UK Government to fund swimming pools, so, as some of that needs to be used to get Bucksburn swimming pool back open again, can the minister tell us today when that money will be allocated?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The member is again trying to make the Scottish Government take decisions for local authorities.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

No—

you’ve got the money for it.

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

Local authorities are elected on their own democratic merit—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Lumsden, I invited you to ask a supplementary question; I did not invite you to then provide the answer. Let the minister be heard.

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

Local authorities have their own democratic mandate to determine how they dispose of the funding that comes to them. Obviously, any money that comes to the Scottish Government in relation to Barnett consequentials will be disbursed in the usual way as part of the budgeting process, and I think that that is absolutely appropriate.

I have already said that we are considering whether there is further financial support that the Scottish Government wants to put in place in relation to those facilities.

Swimming pools and ice facilities are two particular areas where the energy costs are absolutely crippling. The UK Government has the powers and can take action to support those facilities now.

Taxation Proposal (Scottish Green Party)

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it has conducted any modelling on the potential behavioural impact of the Scottish Green Party's proposal to introduce a new increased tax rate for those earning between £75,000 and £125,000. (S6O-02366)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The Scottish Government is aware of the risks and benefits arising from behavioural responses to policy proposals and actively works with stakeholders such as His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to monitor and continually improve the evidence base to help inform policy development.

As is standard practice, any planned changes to Scottish income tax will be announced during the regular annual budget process. Our approach to taxation will continue to be guided by the strategic objectives and principles that are set out in the framework for tax that underpins our fair and proportionate approach.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

Under the Scottish National Party, Scotland is already the highest-taxed part of the UK. Hundreds of thousands of Scottish workers pay more tax for doing the same job as people south of the border. That impacts teachers, police officers and national health service staff. If the SNP plans to increase taxes even more—especially if they listen to the extreme Green Party—it could drive people away. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it would be reckless to increase tax so much that it ends up raising less money to support public services?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

First, based on the latest forecast that was published by the Scottish Fiscal Commission, which is an independent organisation, we calculate that 52 per cent of taxpayers in Scotland will pay less income tax than they would in the rest of the UK.

With regard to the money that is raised, we estimate that the income tax policy changes that have been announced for 2023-24 alone will add £590 million to the Scottish budget. That is additional money to spend on public services, some of which we heard calls for earlier on, and it also supports individuals, households and the economy. If the Tories are saying that they want lower personal and business taxation but higher spending on public services, they are suggesting a financial model that exists nowhere in the world. They need to come clean and tell us what their position is. If it is lower tax and higher spending, how does that work?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There are a number of supplementary questions, which will need to be brief, as will the responses.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

The Greens and the SNP first worked together to make progressive changes to income tax in 2018. The Tories claimed then that it would result in a flight south of the border by high-income taxpayers. Is there any evidence that that actually happened? How much money has been raised for our essential public services as a result of those progressive tax changes?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

In December 2021, we published a policy evaluation of the income tax reforms that were implemented in 2018-19, which showed limited evidence of Scottish taxpayers lowering their taxable income in response to increasing tax rates. Our analysis also suggests that the policy raised between £230 million and £245 million that year, compared with the amount that we would have raised if we had implemented the rates and bands that were applicable elsewhere in the UK. In December 2023, the Scottish Fiscal Commission estimated that our income tax policy will raise £1 billion of additional revenue in 2023-24, compared with what we would have raised if we had matched the UK Government rates. Tory policy puts that money at risk.

Finally, Scotland continues to seek consistent, positive, net inward migration from the rest of the UK, and the latest available figures show that that was around 10,000 people, which we welcome.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Can the Deputy First Minister tell us how much tax revenue would have been lost from the budgets that pay for the national health service, schools and all the other public services if the Scottish Government had copied the UK Government, as the Tories demanded, and cut tax for the wealthiest?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please answer briefly, cabinet secretary.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As I said earlier, the modelling that was done by the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission found that, had we done as the Tories asked and matched UK policy in 2023-24, Scotland would be £1 billion worse off. That is £1 billion that would have been stripped from the NHS, schools, social services and councils, to cover things such as swimming pools, in order to provide a tax cut to the better off. That is what the Tories wanted us to do but, thankfully, we did not do that.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Just a year ago, we were told that the resource spending review was absolutely critical to those questions of our public finances but, yesterday, Shona Robison came to the Finance and Public Administration Committee and told us that the plans for returning the size of the public sector to pre-Covid levels had been scrapped. Has the resource spending review been scrapped in its entirety? Does it form any part of Government policy any more? On 23 June last year, she said that it would “bring to life” her Government’s policy agenda. Has the review been killed off entirely?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

No—but, like any other Government, we have to take account of key elements that change. For example, the negative tax reconciliation—which we now know we will have to deal with next year—was caused by the forecast, due to Covid 19 at that time. We also have to deal with inflation-led pay deals. We did not know that inflation was going to be at the height that it is at, but that has driven pay deals that go well beyond what was budgeted for. We have to deal with all the other inflationary pressures on the budget and we have to make room for spending on social security and health. The RSR remains important but, in the medium-term financial strategy, I set out a plan to deal with all those challenges. What we need to hear from Labour is whether it will back us on those plans.

Budget 2023-24 (Child Poverty)

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what funding has been allocated in the Scottish budget 2023-24 to tackle child poverty. (S6O-02367)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The Scottish budget includes £405 million for our game-changing Scottish child payment and £83.7 million for discretionary housing payments to mitigate the United Kingdom Government’s policies, including the benefit cap.

We continue to invest around £1 billion in the provision of funded early learning and childcare and will make £108 million available for employability support, to enable an increase in services for parents who are out of work or in low-income employment.

Our latest progress report on tackling child poverty, which was published this week, estimates that

“£3 billion was invested across a range of programmes targeted at low income households, with £1.25 billion directly benefitting children.”

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

Last week, a report by End Child Poverty, entitled “Local indicators of child poverty after housing costs, 2021/22”, highlighted that the unacceptable levels of child poverty that remain across the UK are likely to worsen due to the devastating impact of the Tory-driven cost of living crisis.

Although investment within its fixed budget by the Scottish Government, and initiatives such as the Scottish child payment alongside the newly established cash-first approach to tackling food insecurity, are welcome, what fiscal levers would the Scottish Government require to enable it to truly alleviate the pressing issue of child poverty?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Stephanie Callaghan is quite right to point to the Tory-driven cost of living crisis that underpins the challenge that many families are facing with their household budgets at this time. Analysis published on Tuesday with our child poverty progress report estimates that 90,000 fewer children will live in relative and absolute poverty this year as a result of Scottish Government policies, with poverty levels 9 per cent lower than they would otherwise have been.

We are determined to do everything that we can to provide help to those who need it within the scope of our limited powers and fixed budget. As I have just outlined, that includes mitigating the UK Government’s actions. However, we want to do more than mitigate, and it is only by having the full powers that this country needs, and with the Government having all the levers over the economy, social security and employment, including the minimum wage, to tackle poverty and inequalities, that we can truly do that.

I know that the Tories do not like to hear about poverty, but those are the facts.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

Scottish councils have been informed at short notice via the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities that the same level of funding provided for tackling holiday hunger programmes will not be offered this summer by this Scottish National Party Government. That simply confirms that it is willing to stretch local government budgets further and further.

Will the cabinet secretary commit to matching last year’s funding, to ensure that tackling child poverty and hunger programmes that local councils across Scotland had already planned can go ahead?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

As briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

T

he member will know, because the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice said so in the chamber yesterday, that our funding package to local authorities includes targeted support for eligible families during the school holidays throughout the school year. We have provided local authorities with £21.75 million to support free school meals for eligible families during the school holidays during this academic year. That is available to families who are eligible for free school meals on the basis of low income, regardless of the age of their children. Councils have the flexibility to put in place any approach or approaches that meet local needs and circumstances.

Sewage

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

4. To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to propose a parliamentary debate on sewage. (S6O-02368)

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

Any proposals for Government business in Parliament are agreed by the Scottish Cabinet, subject to consideration by the Parliamentary Bureau and, in turn, approval by the Parliament.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am very grateful for that reply, but I am not sure that it was an answer. There was a lack of urgency in the minister’s response, which characterises the Government’s whole approach to the issue. It is an urgent issue—it is urgent to our constituents. Every day, thousands upon thousands of gallons of sewage are purposely dumped in our rivers and our waterways, yet it has been 18 months since we had a meaningful Government statement on the matter, and the only debate held in parliamentary time was a members’ business debate in my name. It is about time that the Scottish Government got to grips with the importance of the issue to our constituents. Will the minister think again and schedule a debate on sewage?

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

I am aware of Mr Cole-Hamilton’s feelings on the matter, and I continue to try to be helpful to him by suggesting that he take it up with the Government minister, Màiri McAllan. Normally, I would say that Mr Cole-Hamilton should take it to his business manager, but, in his case, that might be quite difficult.

As the member mentioned, the topic was debated in October 2022, and the former Minister for Environment and Land Reform gave a ministerial statement in December 2021.

Revenue Reconciliation 2024-25 (Scottish Fiscal Commission)

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what action it will take to address the negative revenue reconciliation of £687 million for 2024-25 that is currently forecast by the Scottish Fiscal Commission. (S6O-02369)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The forecast negative reconciliation of £687 million is driven by a large income tax reconciliation of £712 million, which is offset by other social security and devolved tax block grant adjustments.

To be clear, I note that the large variance to the initial forecast is a consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic having impacted on forecast income tax receipts and associated block grant adjustments in 2021-22.

As the reconciliation crystallises in 2024-25, that will contribute to an extremely challenging funding outlook next year. Of course, I do not have adequate tools under the current fiscal framework to manage that impact, as it exceeds our borrowing limits by almost £400 million.

As set out in “The Scottish Government’s Medium-Term Financial Strategy”, I am planning on the basis of maximising resource borrowing to address the negative reconciliation. The upcoming fiscal framework review must address the limited fiscal flexibility and provide the tools that are needed to manage volatility.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I will need shorter responses.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

At the Finance and Public Administration Committee yesterday, the cabinet secretary admitted that, as a result of the negative reconciliation, combined with the projected increases in Scottish Government expenditure, especially in relation to social security, the outlook for the Scottish budget is particularly challenging. She also admitted that that would require the Scottish Government to make very difficult decisions. When I asked her about that, she said that the Government is reviewing 500 projects. Given the seriousness of the budget situation and the need for urgent action, when will the cabinet secretary be able to provide Parliament with the information that the Finance and Public Administration Committee is requesting in order that it can pursue its budget scrutiny?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

First of all, I note that the position for 2024-25 is not helped by a real-terms cut to both revenue and capital funding from the United Kingdom Government. If Liz Smith could exert any influence in that regard, that would help.

On the review and targeting of projects, as I set out in some detail yesterday, we are working through a programme that looks at every area of Government and how far each goes towards meeting the core missions that were set out by the First Minister a few weeks ago. That process will lead directly to the budget process for 2024-25.

We will set all that out, engage with the Finance and Public Administration Committee in the normal manner and provide it with as much detail as we can, as it becomes available. However, Liz Smith will understand that that process will take some time to come to its conclusion.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that the negative reconciliation is yet another clear example of why it is so important that the revised fiscal framework provide the Scottish Government with the budget levers that are commensurate to addressing the volatility that the Scottish budget is exposed to?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Yes. Our current borrowing powers are limited in scope and, of course, are being eroded by inflation over time. As a result, we must manage a large reconciliation in a single financial year, at a time when our resource borrowing is capped at £300 million.

The upcoming fiscal framework review must rectify that and ensure that the Scottish Parliament has sufficient levers to deal with challenges such as those.

Planning System (Retail)

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

6. To ask the Scottish Government how the planning system can help to create a strong, prosperous and vibrant retail sector, including through business support. (S6O-02370)

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The planning system has a vital role to play in supporting the retail sector. National planning framework 4 encourages proposals that improve and enhance the vibrancy of city, town and local centres. That includes taking a town centre first approach to encourage retail in sustainable locations.

We have also introduced changes to permitted development rights and the use classes order to provide more flexibility for different uses, including retail, in city and town centres. Alongside that, we are working with partners to take forward actions in the town centre action plan and our retail strategy for Scotland.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The structure and nature of Scottish retail has changed over the decades. The prominence of physical retail stores in our towns and shopping centres is gradually declining, and that of social venues such as cafes and eateries is rising. Recently, I visited the Kingsgate shopping centre in Dunfermline, where the management highlighted the significant financial costs that Fife Council has imposed on those who wish to reflect the change by altering their business category from class 1 retail to category 3 hospitality. Will the minister outline what more the Scottish Government can do to lessen those costs for businesses, and how the planning system can better reflect the changing nature of retail?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

I thank Roz McCall for that really important question.

One of the challenges that we hear from business and from planning authorities across Scotland is how we will ensure that they have the resource to deal speedily with planning applications. That is partly

about ensuring that planning is properly funded. Recently, we increased the fees that planning authorities can charge, which has allowed planning authorities up and down the country to potentially retain or employ new staff.

There is a balance to be struck. However, businesses often say that what is most important to them is that they get a speedy resolution to planning applications.

Fiscal Policy (Impact on Businesses)

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the finance secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding any impact that its fiscal policy platform will have on Scottish businesses, including tourism and hospitality businesses. (S6O-02371)

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and I regularly discuss fiscal policy with our ministerial colleagues. That includes the impacts on a range of sectors, including tourism and hospitality.

We are committed to supporting sustainable and inclusive economic growth and will focus on economic policies and actions that have the greatest potential to grow and strengthen Scotland’s economy.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The Scottish tourism sector has faced a catalogue of poorly thought through policies that threaten to seriously undermine the success of tourism and hospitality businesses. The short-term let scheme, the tourist tax and utter failure in respect of our infrastructure, including ferries and the A9, are Scottish National Party thorns in the side of Scottish tourism.

When the sector has asked for time to recover, why has the SNP ignored it and pushed ahead with a string of burdensome priorities that have caused distress and worry for businesses throughout Scotland?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

We engage very closely with representatives of the tourism sector across a range of issues, including through our work on the new deal for business. We have delivered across a range of infrastructure projects over our time in government, including completion of the M74, the M8, the M80, the Aberdeen western peripheral road and the Queensferry crossing, as well as a range of other activities that are of benefit to the tourism sector and other businesses across Scotland.

As we take forward our proposals for a visitor levy, we will continue to engage very closely with business.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Last week we debated tourism, and it was very clear then that energy costs, inflation and Brexit labour shortages require action by the London Government. Has the minister had any engagement with the United Kingdom Government on it either taking action or giving Scotland those powers?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I agree that the Scottish Government would have much greater freedom to support the tourism sector, which is vital to the Scottish economy, with the full powers of independence. The tourism sector is in need of more support, but we are constrained by the limited fiscal levers that we currently control. That is why we continually urge the UK Government to go further with its reserved tax powers, and why we specifically highlight that a reduced rate of VAT is a consistent ask from stakeholders. We will continue to urge the UK Government to do more to support Scottish businesses.

“Local government in Scotland: Overview 2023”

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the recent Accounts Commission report, “Local government in Scotland: Overview 2023”. (S6O-02372)

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The Scottish Government welcomes the findings of the “Local government in Scotland: Overview 2023” report. The report rightly points to the pressures on the public finances, but it also confirms that, despite over a decade of United Kingdom Government austerity, local authority revenue funding has increased by 2.6 per cent in real terms between 2013-14 and 2023-24.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I thank the minister for that response, but he cannot ignore or wish away the evidence that is contained in the report. In adult social care,

“There are signs that the sector is in crisis, with growing backlogs, declining satisfaction and no clear picture of demand or unmet need”.

In housing, there are growing rent arrears, mounting voids and poorer maintenance performance, and homelessness is spiralling once again. In culture and leisure, there is a “high risk of closures”. In children’s services, the poverty-related attainment gap “remains larger than pre-pandemic” levels. The list goes on.

Does the minister agree that the Government must stop managing decline, stop inflicting cuts on the poorest communities, and must start by introducing a tax on wealth?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

We look forward to hearing Richard Leonard’s contributions to the budget in the form of proposals. I know that the cabinet secretary will be happy to listen to and engage with Labour if it has serious proposals. That will be a first, as I have been in Parliament for 16 years, and I think that we have been given one serious proposal that would have given extra money to local government. That came from Alex Rowley of the Labour Party but I do not think—[

Interruption

.] I do not think that the Labour group supported it. The Scottish National Party could not support it at that time. [

Interruption

.]

We do not for a second underestimate the challenges that—[

Interruption

.]—local government and other public services are facing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I ask members on the Opposition front benches to stop heckling the minister while he is providing the answer.

Minister, could you conclude?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

Thanks, Presiding Officer. I could just hear chuntering, so I am not sure what the sedentary point being made was.

Richard Leonard made the good point that we need to address the challenges. That is why we are working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on a new deal for local government. It is co-produced work that I hope all parties in Parliament will sign up to, in order to recognise the democratic mandate that local government has. It is time to allow local government its space as one of the spheres of government in Scotland. This Government is determined to do that: I hope that the Opposition will step up, too.

NHS Waiting Times

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-09462, in the name of Jackie Baillie, on taking action on national health service waiting times. I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak button.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

There are 779,533 patients on waiting lists in Scotland. That is one in seven Scots, and it is the highest number of people waiting since records began. At the same time, there has been a 73 per cent increase in the number of people going private because they cannot wait any longer. Despite that and the warm words and promises of action, the number of people waiting is increasing. When Humza Yousaf took over as health secretary, 603,000 people were waiting for diagnosis or treatment; now, the figure is 175,000 higher.

This touches every area, from failure to meet cancer waiting times targets, which we know has profound consequences on outcomes; to orthopaedics, where people are suffering in pain, waiting for literally years for treatment; to children waiting in distress for more than a year for an appointment with child and adolescent mental health services. In response, Humza Yousaf set targets for people with the longest waits to be treated. We welcomed the fact that out-patient waits of more than two years were to be eradicated—completely gone—by August 2022, but that has not happened. In-patient waits of more than two years were also to be eradicated by September 2022. That has not happened. Waits of more than 18 months were to be eradicated by December 2022 for out-patients. That also has not happened. One-year waits for out-patients were to be gone completely by March 2023, and—you guessed it, Presiding Officer—that has not happened either. In fact, there are 31,498 patients still waiting.

By every measure that the Scottish National Party Government has set itself, it has failed. In England, with a population 10 times greater than that in Scotland, there are only 599 people waiting more than two years, while here the figure is 7,849, which is 13 times higher. It is clear that the NHS recovery plan that was launched two years ago simply has not worked.

The consequences of that could not be more stark. Over 18,300 patients died while on waiting lists last year, which is a 39 per cent increase on the number of such deaths before the pandemic. Those are people for whom treatment could have saved or prolonged their lives. While SNP members are fighting like ferrets in a sack, mired by their internal party scandals, Scotland’s healthcare system plunges deeper into crisis.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

Will Jackie Baillie give way?

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

No, I do not have time.

All those numbers are, of course, people whose lives are put on hold while they wait, often in pain, to get the medical care that they need. They are people like 82-year-old Robert Stone, who has been waiting more than three years for a knee replacement. His daughter Carol Murray told me:

“He’s now lost all his dignity because of waiting so long. He is sleeping in a bed in ... his living room because he can’t access his bedroom. ... He has become a prisoner in his own home. ... He is now being treated like a dog waiting for scraps.

Where is the fairness in this? Where is the humanity in this? ... I feel like I am slowly watching my father’s demise before my eyes.”

He is one of the shocking 2,207 people who have waited for more than two years for orthopaedic surgery. Humza Yousaf pledged to end such waits by September 2022.

The creation of national treatment centres to get through the backlog and streamline the approach to diagnostics and treatment was a welcome step. It is therefore hugely disappointing that many have been delayed and that there is a funding shortfall and a lack of staffing. It took a freedom of information request from the Scottish Labour Party to get the details out of the SNP Government. We now know that the Government is unlikely to meet its commitment for national treatment centres to deliver an additional 40,000 in-patient and day-case procedures in 2025-26. The response states that

“projections included in the NHS Recovery Plan have dropped significantly”.

Plans for 1,500 additional staff by 2026—a commitment in the NHS recovery plan—are unlikely to be met, with some boards already experiencing staff recruitment challenges. In March, a briefing to the cabinet secretary revealed that there was no revenue funding source for the national treatment centres that are not yet in construction. To top it all, the remaining programme is “not affordable” on the basis of the current capital spending review.

In August 2022, the update on national treatment centres showed that five centres were classed as red, meaning that they were in danger of not being delivered until 2027, such was the limited progress being made.

Will the cabinet secretary publish the revised schedule for national treatment centres? Will he confirm whether they will all proceed and the timescale for them? Given that the NHS budget is reportedly overspent and that capital projects are being cancelled, we need transparency and we need that information.

Not content with crashing the health service, the SNP is now failing to deliver the modest recovery plan that it promised to implement. Waiting times are increasing. National treatment centres were promised but have not been delivered. Staffing targets are not being met. Ultimately, patients are being let down.

We urgently need a new recovery plan, and we need clinicians to lead that process. Clinicians and Versus Arthritis have been arguing for a recovery plan for orthopaedics—the single largest component of waiting lists—for years, but Humza Yousaf did not listen to them. Will the cabinet secretary commit to such a plan now?

SNP incompetence is threatening the very existence of our NHS. Michael Matheson must act now to support our valiant NHS staff and to undo the deadly legacy of his predecessor—Scotland’s worst-ever health minister, Humza Yousaf.

I move,

That the Parliament is deeply concerned that NHS waiting lists continue to increase to record levels, with over 779,000 patients awaiting treatment; regrets that over 18,300 patients died on NHS waiting lists in 2022, whilst the number of people in Scotland paying for private treatment has increased by 73% since before the COVID-19 pandemic; notes that the Scottish Government has failed to meet its revised national targets for tackling long waits for planned care; is concerned about the delay in rolling out the network of National Treatment Centres; recognises that the NHS is facing a workforce crisis, with over 7,000 vacancies unfilled, and agency costs spiralling to £567 million in 2022-23, and calls on the Scottish Ministers to bring forward a revised NHS Recovery Plan, in consultation with key stakeholders, to reduce long waits as a matter of urgency.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

L

et me start by acknowledging the importance of this topic. I welcome the opportunity to highlight the progress that has been made by our NHS and, equally, the challenges that we continue to face. It is important to state at the outset that we remain focused on ensuring that the health service recovers from the greatest challenge in its history, and I take this opportunity to thank our exceptional health and social care staff, who are at the heart of our services.

However, for many people accessing NHS or social care services, their experience is not what they or I would like it to be. There is work still to be done, and that is encapsulated in the published commitments that the First Minister and I have made to achieve a series of tangible improvements in the health and social care system by 2026. Those commitments include reducing NHS waiting times year on year and delivering new national treatment centres.

Inevitably, pausing planned treatment during the pandemic has led to a build-up in the number of people waiting. We must recognise that our health service has experienced unprecedented pressures, including pandemic backlogs, staff shortages and the most difficult winter in the NHS’s history. I recognise that challenges remain, but I am committed to delivering sustained improvements and year-on-year reductions in waiting times through service redesign and enhanced regional and national working.

Even in the face of those challenges, we continue to see progress in the reduction of long waits, following the introduction of the targets last year. We have seen a substantive reduction in new out-patient over-two-year waits since the targets were announced, with 80 per cent of specialties having fewer than 10 over-two-year waits while 20 per cent have none.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Data on our 18-month out-patient target shows that the number of people waiting more than 78 weeks reduced by 48.5 per cent between June last year and March this year, and data on our 12-month out-patient target shows that 41 per cent of specialties had fewer than 10 patients waiting more than 52 weeks. Over-two-year waits for in-patient and day-case treatment have reduced, too, by 27 per cent since the targets were announced.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I will give way to Jackie Baillie, because she was first.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The cabinet secretary will of course realise that the targets that his predecessor set were to completely eradicate

those waiting lists—he did not say, “Reduce them”; he said, “Eradicate them”—and that those targets were set after the pandemic.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

As I have outlined, we are making steady progress and seeing capacity increase in our NHS in order to continue to reduce those waiting lists.

All that work is further supported by our flagship national treatment centre programme. Four NTCs are opening this year, which will provide significant new and protected capacity for orthopaedics, ophthalmics and diagnostics. The new centres, which include ones in NHS Fife and NHS Highland that opened in March and April, will provide eight orthopaedic theatres, an in-patient and day-case ward, three endoscopy rooms and two general theatres.

I recognise that orthopaedics is one of our most challenged specialties, which is why last week I met orthopaedic leads and asked them to support the development of a clear and specific plan for orthopaedics, considering capacity and what further improvements can be achieved. I want to see direct action in addressing the issue of orthopaedics, which Jackie Baillie raised.

The work that we are taking forward also includes investing in the recruitment and retention of staff. NHS staff levels are historically high under this Government, with nearly 23 per cent more in post than when we came into government. Only last week, I announced that health boards have exceeded the target of recruiting an additional 750 registered nurses and allied health professionals from overseas, with 800 firm offers in place. We will continue to do what we can to make a long-term investment in healthcare education, too, which is demonstrated by our funding a record number of nursing and midwifery student places this year.

I reiterate my commitment to recovery and reform for a sustainable NHS, and my commitment to focus on what can be done now and in the short term to maximise all capacity and resources to ensure that we see further improvements this year and into next year. As we build on the progress that we have made in the face of our challenges, we will continue to maximise our capacity to achieve year-on-year reductions in the number of people who have waited too long for treatment in NHS Scotland.

I move amendment S6M-09462.2, to leave out from “is deeply” to end and insert,

“recognises the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on both the people of Scotland directly, and on the operation of the health service; further recognises that too many people are waiting too long for treatment, and welcomes the reductions in the longest waits recently; notes that health services across the four nations are dealing with the effects of the pandemic on waiting times, and recognises that use of the independent sector by individuals is proportionately lower than that in England or Wales; supports the twin approach of investment and reform of the NHS so that delivery continues to be enhanced, backed by investment founded in progressive taxation; appreciates that the workforce is at the heart of all that the NHS does, and thanks everyone working in the NHS for their dedication, expertise and commitment; believes that the NHS must be kept true to its founding principles of being publicly owned, publicly operated, and free at the point of need, and further believes that the only way to protect the NHS from the threat posed by the UK Government is to realise independence for Scotland.”

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Sandesh Gulhane to speak to and move amendment S6M-09462.1 for up to four minutes.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a practising NHS general practitioner.

Our heroic NHS staff have been failed by the SNP’s management of Scotland’s NHS. The multitude of failures and the neglect have resulted in prolonged suffering and deteriorating health for countless patients. The consequences of dereliction of duty are far reaching and unacceptable. More than 800,000 Scots are on NHS waiting lists; more than 18,000 Scots died last year while waiting for treatment. Cancer waiting times in Scotland are the worst ever.

Let us be clear: that is not down to Covid—the SNP last met its target more than a decade ago. It is a betrayal of trust and a failure to deliver the quality healthcare that patients deserve. It is simply unacceptable.

Equally distressing are the record waiting times in accident and emergency departments. Urgent action is needed to rectify that dire situation, but does the SNP-Green Government act? No, it does not.

The failure to meet waiting times for child and adolescent mental health services has left so many of our young people in jeopardy. Again, that is not due to Covid. The SNP has never met its target for 90 per cent of children and young people to start treatment within 18 weeks of referral.

When Humza Yousaf was promoted to First Minister, 7,700 children were left waiting to start treatment. That is a disgrace. The Deputy First Minister also knows a thing or two about announcements and no delivery. When Shona Robison was health secretary, she promised to end delayed discharge from hospital by the end of 2015. Seven years on, more than 17,000 beds a day are occupied due to delayed discharge.

Moreover, SNP-Green Government cuts to general practitioner budgets, as well as to health and social care spending, demonstrate a shocking lack of foresight and a disregard for the wellbeing of the population—£65 million has been cut from the primary care budget, £38 million from mental health care and £17 million from social care.

Since the SNP promised, in 2017, to increase the number of GPs by 800, GP numbers have actually decreased by 26, yet that pledge was made time and again by Humza Yousaf, who said in the chamber and in the press that the Government was on target.

The SNP has undermined the very foundations of our healthcare system, leaving it teetering on the brink of collapse. We now have an alarming number of vacancies for clinical staff: more than 6,000 nurses are missing and the Scottish Government is spending an exorbitant amount on hiring agency staff.

Take note: over the past decade, the SNP has short-changed our NHS by more than £17 million and not fully passed on the Barnett consequentials to our health service. The SNP’s management of Scotland’s NHS is marred by record failure, and it is clear that the SNP has run out of ideas. We need a fresh approach that incorporates modern, efficient and local solutions in healthcare. In light of those pressing issues, we call on the cabinet secretary for health to present a revised NHS recovery plan—one that includes the fact that Humza Yousaf knew in February that the projections for his flimsy recovery plan had dropped significantly.

Scotland does not need a cabinet secretary who is just a continuity candidate. There is a palpable lack of accountability and a history of failure. We urge the cabinet secretary to deliver a credible plan—a fresh approach that prioritises the wellbeing of our people and ensures that our healthcare system is properly supported.

I move amendment S6M-09462.1, to insert after “2022-23”:

“; notes with concern that long waits are an issue throughout all aspects of the health service, with cancer waiting times at their worst ever level, A&E targets not being met in three years, and the Scottish Government failing to clear the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) backlog”.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am grateful to Jackie Baillie for securing time for this important debate. I would say that I am happy to speak in it, but that would be a lie. I mean, here we are again—

it is like beating your head against a brick wall. The facts that are set out in the motion make for grim reading indeed. We keep having to have this debate in Opposition time, because the Government will not get to grips with the crisis that it is presiding over.

A staggering 779,000 people are waiting for treatment, and some 7,000 of them have been waiting for more than two years. There has been a 73 per cent increase in the number of Scots who are paying for private medical treatment. The very worst statistic of all is that more than 18,000 patients died while waiting for treatment last year alone—18,000.

Think about that for a second, Presiding Officer, because we are in the foothills of a public inquiry that will ascertain the root causes and decisions that contributed to the deaths of 15,000 Scots during the entirety of the pandemic. How many of those 18,000 people might be alive today were it not for the crisis that is engulfing our national health service? The stakes simply could not be higher.

I have lost count of the number of times that we have had to debate this issue in Opposition time. Whether they are forced to wait for hours for an ambulance or to be seen at A and E, left abandoned on trolleys or languishing on wards, people are being let down. I fear that we have become accustomed and desensitised to crisis and, indeed, tragedy in our health service.

It is simply not good enough. We may have a new First Minister and a new health secretary, but it is the same old, same old when it comes to ministerial disinterest and mismanagement. Did someone mention continuity? It feels as though that is what we are getting.

I want to be crystal clear from the outset that none of that is the fault of NHS staff. They have worked their socks off. They have worked for long hours, often under the most stressful conditions imaginable, and they deserve our utmost thanks—but they are being let down as well. There are currently more than 7,000 NHS workforce vacancies left unfilled. The chair of the British Medical Association Scotland, Dr Iain Kennedy, has said that doctors and other healthcare workers are “exhausted” and “facing burn-out” under increasing workloads.

Now the Government’s failure to negotiate fair pay means that junior doctors are set to strike, making things even more difficult. When he was health secretary, Humza Yousaf repeatedly rejected my party’s calls for a staff burnout prevention strategy and a health and social care staff assembly. How helpful might those have proved to be in allowing junior doctors to feel better supported and ensuring a conduit for their views to be heard? Instead, they now feel that they have no recourse other than industrial action. Let us remember that Humza Yousaf, during his leadership campaign, set great store by pointing to Scotland as the only place where NHS strikes were not happening—well, they are happening now.

Under this Government’s watch, costs for temporary staff rose to £567 million last year. It would seem that, rather than making the meaningful investment that our health service needs, this Government is relying on short-term fixes to plug the gaps. They are sticking plasters.

The SNP enjoys comparing Scotland with the rest of the UK when it suits it, which is not so with NHS waiting times. Waits in Scotland are twice the length of those south of the border. In England, around 10,000 patients have been waiting longer than 18 months for treatment; in Scotland, 21,000 have. It is no wonder, then, that so many people are turning to private medical treatment. The Government should be utterly embarrassed by that. Competent management of our health service is, perhaps, the measure of a civilised society. It is what we elect our Government to do, first and foremost. What an indictment it is, then, that people are being forced to pay to get well.

Let me say to the Government and to the health secretary: stop blaming the pandemic. It insults the intelligence and seriously tests the patience of both staff and patients. Instead, the Government must now follow the advice of the Scottish Liberal Democrats and invest in our health service, give staff the fair pay that they deserve, adopt our burnout prevention strategy and set up that staff assembly, so that doctors, nurses and junior trainees can feel heard and understood, rather than ignored and unappreciated.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We move to the open debate and back-bench speeches of up to four minutes.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I appreciate that the SNP has other things to be worried about this week, but Scottish Labour remains firmly focused on the priorities of Scottish people. That is why we are debating the issue of increasing waiting lists, which is impacting so many across the country. Labour was required to bring this important debate to the chamber, as the current Government tries to hide from the necessary business of the day. The Government needs to listen, and to act.

One in seven Scots find themselves on waiting lists today. Many of them have been waiting for months, if not years. Many, like the countless constituents who have been contacting me, are waiting with insufferable pain. Tragically, many have died while waiting.

The Scottish Government can point to the pandemic as a global factor that caused unavoidable challenges; predictably, the cabinet secretary did so. Indeed, we do not disagree—we know that the pandemic exacerbated issues with waiting lists. However, the reality is that it is disingenuous and plainly incorrect to suggest that it was not an issue before, and it is disingenuous and plainly wrong to say today that we are making good progress. I had been told to expect better from this cabinet secretary.

Long waiting lists predate the pandemic. They are a result of Governments avoiding difficult decisions; in Scotland, that is in plain sight. They are a result of a Government that is tired, after 16 years, and that has failed services, staff and patients. Why? To push its own agenda. Let me be clear that our NHS workforce is incredible. The service that they continue to strive to provide daily is of the highest standard, but they are being badly let down and they deserve a lot better.

In relation to debates such as this, we all look at the correspondence that we receive from constituents, who feel helpless. They are in pain, they are suffering and they cannot live the lives that they want to live with their children, friends and families. They feel guilty for being unable to do the things that they used to be able to do, because they are sitting on waiting lists and they have no indication of when their time will come. That is the unfortunate reality of SNP Scotland.

The SNP members at the back of the chamber will not like to hear this, but they know as well as we do that it is a reality; they receive correspondence from constituents, too. Do they scrutinise, or do they accept the excuses? Do they push those on the SNP front benches to do something, or do they clap to drown out the reality?

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Will the member take an intervention?

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I will not take an intervention, thank you. Members need to listen to this. They

need to live with the decisions that they make in that regard.

Like others, I was shocked and saddened to hear that more than 18,000 people had died on NHS waiting lists last year. If the trend continues, the figure will be more than 20,000 this year. That is tragic.

If that does anything, it should tell the cabinet secretary and the Government that more of the same simply will not do. We need a plan for reducing waiting lists that supports NHS staff by improving recruitment and retention; by opening up national treatment centres urgently, supported by a highly skilled workforce; and by delivering for patients through action, rather than making promises and failing to follow through. It has become clearer to people every day that this Government, while it is no stranger to a strategy, has a poor relationship with delivery. That must change.

The challenges that we face with waiting lists are 16 years in the making, and they have undoubtedly been worsened in recent years by existing problems. Despite that, however, the NHS workforce is lacking a funded and targeted investment plan. This Government is falling short on reducing waiting lists; it is time that it stepped up and provided a service to our NHS staff and patients.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I welcome the debate. It is right that we look at the NHS.

However, I sometimes think, when Labour brings these health issues to the chamber, that its members are living very much in a political bubble and not looking at what is happening on the ground. In my constituency of Coatbridge and Chryston, the Labour Party would have removed the accident and emergency department from our local hospital, Monklands, if it had had its way and if it had not been for this Government and the previous Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing and First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, reversing the decision. That is never mentioned, but it would have been an absolutely catastrophic blow—

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Sixteen years ago.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

That was 16 years ago—what is happening now?

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Members are saying “16 years”, but that is—

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the member give way?

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I will not be taking any interventions, because I have only four minutes—Labour should have picked a time when there was longer for debate.

The key issue in the debate is to address NHS waiting lists and the workforce crisis. That is an issue, and it is important that we are discussing such issues, but we have to do so—as the cabinet secretary has said—in the context of the past few years.

Yes, it is true that waiting lists for certain treatments are long; we will all have constituents and personal contacts who have experienced that. However, it is also true that the pandemic brought about the most challenging set of circumstances in the 75-year history of our NHS—

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the member take a brief intervention on that point?

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I cannot—I am sorry.

That applies to the health service not only in Scotland but in Northern Ireland, Wales and England. The Labour motion completely fails to acknowledge that, but it is the reality of the situation. We are not alone in that.

It is true that the Scottish Government decides policy and funding for the NHS, and it is also true that the Scottish Government funds the NHS to a higher level, proportionately, than other Governments across the UK—[

Interruption

.]

It is the Labour Party members, and their friends in the Tory party, who do not like those facts.

The SNP-led Government’s £100 billion NHS recovery plan has delivered a significant reduction in the number of two-year out-patient waits. The waiting time targets have already led to a substantial increase in the number of patients seen, with almost 56,000 in-patients or day cases, and more than 311,000 out-patients, seen in the quarter to the end of December 2022. Those are the highest numbers of patients seen since the onset of the Covid pandemic.

With regard to staffing, once again, we must consider the issue in the wider context of the rest of the UK. Since the SNP first entered government, NHS staffing has increased by 22.7 per cent. Recent research from the end of 2022 shows that NHS Scotland has higher staffing per head than NHS England. Scotland has also invested in the future sustainability of the NHS, with NHS agenda for change staff being paid better here than anywhere else in the UK.

There is an issue with bank staff—as MSPs, we all hear that. Perhaps the cabinet secretary can reflect on that in summing up, because a lot of staff are saying that they can get better pay as bank staff.

Finally, the motion touches on the rise in the number of patients having to pay for private care, and it is important to analyse that increase in a wider context. The rise in the number of people paying for private healthcare is, again, not unique to Scotland; it affects health services right across the UK. Wales has similar rates, and self-pay admissions have been at their highest or joint highest levels over the past four years in eight out of nine English regions.

The rise in the number of patients across the UK having to use private healthcare is very concerning to me, and it is probably concerning for others. However, unlike the Tories—and perhaps Labour as well—who might be happy for our NHS to be run by private providers like in England, and Labour, whose private finance initiative policies caused unprecedented damage to our NHS, the Scottish Government continues to support the principle of a public service that is free at the point of use and need.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Will the member give way?

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

No, I will not.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The member is about to conclude.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

The Scottish Government supported buy-outs of hospital car parks in Glasgow and Dundee last year and supported the ending of private finance initiative contracts that outsourced a range of hospital support services. For example, Wishaw hospital in my colleague Clare Adamson’s constituency has brought those services back in-house.

The NHS in Scotland faces grave challenges, but the Scottish Government continues to fund and support our NHS with the limited powers that we have. I will leave it there.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Fulton MacGregor is trying to defend the indefensible. What can be said in four minutes? Let me start by saying how let down patients, their families and NHS workers feel. We put a lot of trust in the NHS; we trust it with our lives and the lives of our loved ones, but dedicated doctors and nurses feel the frustrations of a system that too often fails patients, and they feel that acutely.

A health board in my constituency is in special measures because of a failure of leadership accountability and culture. The lack of accountability is startling. The board has launched a host of initiatives, but, as elected representatives, we are told that it is too soon to say whether they are working. The special measures will probably last for more than a year. My constituents are fully entitled to question how well the NHS works in their area, and they are entitled to explanations for huge waiting lists and missed targets.

The more waiting lists increase, the more people who have paid their taxes and put their trust in the system are being let down. We all know that it is heartbreaking to listen to their stories. It comes down to a lack of capacity in the system, which is a failure of leadership by the Government. Many people in my constituency struggle even to get an appointment at their local health centre, because general practice lists are full to bursting point.

I am not saying any of that to criticise the brilliant people who work tirelessly in our NHS. For most NHS staff, their work is a vocation. They consistently go above and beyond, because, if they did not, the whole system would collapse. However, they are being asked to do more and more, and, as a result, their mental health suffers.

We have record levels of spending in the NHS despite the fact that the Scottish Government did not pass on £16 billion of Barnett consequentials that should have gone into the health service. We also have record levels of vacancies, and there is a crisis in recruitment and retention. There are astonishing levels of vacancies in key roles.

What has gone wrong? In short, there has been a catastrophic failure of workforce planning, and that failure is the failure of SNP Scottish ministers and their lack of strategic planning. They are in their 17th year in government. There can be no passing of the buck.

We have a problem of toxic workplace cultures in many places, including in NHS Forth Valley, meaning that critically important staff are leaving. Time and again, whistleblowers speak of bullying and intimidation. All that is not happening just because of the pandemic. Nothing makes NHS workers more frustrated or angry than to hear ministers trot out those tired old lines, because this goes a long way back before the pandemic; it goes back to when Andrew Neil said to Nicola Sturgeon in an interview that the NHS in Scotland needed legislation to protect it from the SNP. What we are talking about in this debate is a colossal failure of Government.

The NHS is a complex organisation and bringing about change is akin to turning around a fleet of tankers, but management tick boxing has been prioritised by management over providing the service that patients expect and need. To change the culture, we need leadership, and that starts at the top. Courage is needed to break the failed groupthink that currently exists in too many parts of Scotland’s NHS. We need a culture that focuses on delivering the core purpose of the NHS: patient-centred care that is free at the point of need. For that to happen, I fear that we need a new set of Scottish ministers who are open to the change that is needed badly.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Across the country, patients and staff are crying out for help to get the treatment that they need or support to do their job; that is what overwhelms my email inbox and office phone line. I get email after email and call after call from people who are in pain, unable to work or unable to go about their daily life because they are on a waiting list with no end in sight. If that is what I get and what Carol Mochan gets, it is what every single MSP will be getting, yet the Government comes to the chamber and dismisses those concerns. Instead, it continues to blame the pandemic for record waiting times, delays to national treatment centres and an NHS workforce crisis.

It is more than two years on from the 2021 election, which is when the people of Cumbernauld and Kilsyth were promised a new treatment centre that we were told would help to clear the waiting lists, but the Government has not even mentioned the treatment centre in its amendment to the motion. In Cumbernauld, it will be June 2028 before the first patients are seen, and even that date is doubtful. The centre will not open in 2026, as was promised on those glossy election leaflets. The treatment centre was meant to help people who were on gynaecology, urology and ophthalmology waiting lists—waiting lists that the health board said had increased by 83 per cent before Covid. At the end of March this year, of those people who were on waiting lists for those specialisms, more than half of ophthalmology patients had been waiting more than 12 weeks, half of all gynaecology patients had waiting times of six months and a quarter of urology patients will wait more than a year.

Under Humza Yousaf, nothing was done to recover from the pandemic, and now we are left with waiting lists that are the First Minister’s legacy; this is his mess, and those are his waiting lists. Freedom of information requests that I have seen show two years that have simply been wasted. Damning internal documents put into doubt the new centre that is meant for Cumbernauld. Report after report has warned that NHS Lanarkshire is concerned about its

“inability to fund and recruit additional workforce”.

The health board is concerned about how it will attract staff to the town, and, worse still,

“due to workforce restrictions, the board may have to increase days of working per week.”

That means asking burnt-out NHS staff, who are already struggling, to increase their working week to cover for SNP Government failures. That is entirely unacceptable, but the First Minister knows that—he knows that he wasted two years while those waiting lists spiralled.

When the First Minister gave an update on his NHS recovery plan in October 2022, it scrubbed out the timescales for Cumbernauld’s new local centre, and, when the health board did the right thing and said that the opening date should be pushed back to 2028, his Government published its updates with no dates at all. That was a cover-up operation consisting of spin to deceive the people of Cumbernauld. That centre was meant to be worth £40 million in investment and more than £12 million annually, but now it goes without a mention in any Government documents. The First Minister did that knowing full well that, only two months earlier, officials had told him that those election commitments were at risk. They said that

“successful delivery appears to be unachievable”

and that

“the major issues do not appear to be manageable or resolvable”.

That advice was given to the First Minister.

The Government has let down the community of Cumbernauld, and, in today’s amendment, it washes its hands of the issue. Instead of talking about investment in the town, the amendment droned on about England and Wales. The SNP wants to be in power, but it never takes responsibility. Patients and staff are fed up with endless excuses and the Government’s constant blaming of someone else for its ineptitude. Only the Labour Party will properly fund our NHS, ensure that it is fighting fit and deliver the treatment centre for Cumbernauld that is so desperately needed.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I am so disappointed this afternoon. I am disappointed because our health service has challenges—there is no doubt about that—but the Labour Party has brought to the chamber a debate that completely ignores the impact of the coronavirus on our NHS and it is attacking this Government while completely failing to point out the inadequacies of the Westminster Government, including the Trussonomics budget that led to what Mark Drakeford described as a sledgehammer being taken to the economy and public service. Both of those things have had an impact on the NHS in Scotland, too.

We have big challenges to face. However, given some of the things that have been said about workforce planning and about people working, I say to Conservative colleagues, including Dr Gulhane, that the pension rules that have made it financially unattractive for retired health service professionals to come back and support the health service are not in the control of this Government. They are in the control of—

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

No. I will not take any interventions.

Those rules are in the control of Westminster—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Members!

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Westminster could have changed those pension rules. It is quite ready to come forward with section 35 orders on things that we want to do here. How about fixing the pensions situation so that retired doctors and doctors who would be willing to come back to the NHS can do so at financial benefit—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Dr Gulhane, please. We need to listen to the member who has the floor. [

Interruption

.] Excuse me, Dr Gulhane. I said that we need to listen to the member who has the floor. Thank you very much indeed. Ms Adamson, please continue.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

What about the immigration system? What about the hostile environment that makes it less attractive for people to come here? Brexit has in itself made people think twice about coming to the United Kingdom. However, I have spoken already in the chamber and I will speak again about the plight of Sudanese health workers who have gone home or who were in Sudan at the time of the conflict and have been unable to bring their families here, or have been unable to come back into the country with an elderly relative and are stuck in Egypt or in Dubai. These are people who work for our health service, who are being denied the opportunity to help their families at a terrible, terrible time of need.

Where are the Tories when it comes to fixing that situation to make it more attractive for people to stay and to be able to come and work here? That is a shocking indictment of what the UK Government is doing in terms of immigration, and we wonder why we cannot recruit people.

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I am not going to take any interventions—sorry. [

Interruption

.]

Craig Hoy

rose—

I have just a very short time for my speech this afternoon. [

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Members! I have already said that we need to listen to the member who has the floor. Thank you.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I understand Labour’s concerns. I think that we all understand the concerns for our NHS. However, it is simply not possible to ignore what Labour’s own ministers

have said or the concerns that they have raised, including the Minister for Health and Social Services in the Welsh Government, Eluned Morgan, who recently blamed chronic underfunding by the UK Government for making the management of the Welsh NHS extremely difficult and who called last winter the most difficult time in the history of the NHS. Those concerns are also felt in Scotland. Those have also been the conditions that our health workers have been working in.

I agree that we need to work harder, and Michael Matheson has pointed out how hard he is working to ensure that we still have the best-paid health workers in this country and that we can protect things such as free prescriptions and free eye tests—things that people in Scotland value. However, it would be really nice if the Labour Party, for once, could put a bit of criticism on to the UK Government about its failure to support the NHS here and in Wales.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Can you tell us whether there is a means by which it is possible to amend or correct the official record of this Parliament when a member has knowingly or unknowingly presented things in a speech that are factually incorrect—for example, in relation to pensions and doctors or perhaps in relation to record levels of immigration to this country over the past two years?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Kerr for his contribution. We are straying into debating points. On the issue of correcting the record, I think that Mr Kerr is well aware of the mechanism that exists to that end.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

I begin by expressing my heartfelt thanks to everyone who works in our NHS. They have had a mountain to climb since the outbreak of the pandemic. The fact that so many staff members have worked so hard to keep us safe while facing that enormous challenge is incredible. There have also been huge impacts on patients, with too many people waiting too long for treatment due to the backlog in care that has been exacerbated by Covid. It is undeniable that we have to get those waits down. However, it is also essential that people are supported while they wait.

In the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, we have been hearing about waiting well initiatives that are being implemented by health boards, whereby patients are sent letters when there are long waits. In NHS Fife, for example, staff engage in person-centred conversations with patients in all specialties to give them information about the expected waiting time and the reasons behind that and to signpost them to other opportunities. That keeps the lines of communication open and allows patients to keep in touch with the relevant consultants.

In my region, NHS Forth Valley has implemented assessment appointments in order to reduce waiting times. Between July and September 2022, all patients who were on the adult psychological therapies waiting list were offered an assessment appointment with a clinician, which allowed them to be matched to an appropriate intervention without unnecessary waits. That has reduced waits, but it has also allowed the board to undertake more effective service planning to better match the types of demand to capacity. We would all recognise that that has relevance beyond the current time period.

Keeping in contact with patients who are on waiting lists and keeping them informed about how long they can reasonably expect to wait will help to reduce patient anxiety. It is worth noting that boards are implementing new and innovative ways to do that. However, there is still much work to do.

I am very concerned about staff wellbeing, as I know other members will be, given the amount of pressure that people are under. Staff had to shift from fighting Covid-19 during the worst periods of the pandemic to tackling the huge backlog that built up during the lockdowns. Members have heard many times about the impact that that has had on people. Staff are also being affected by workforce pressures, as vacancies are a key barrier to reducing workloads and waiting times. Recruitment efforts must be prioritised, as must retention. We need to ensure that the NHS has sufficient staff to tackle the backlog, and the promotion of staff wellbeing must play a key part in improving retention.

In the health committee, we have also heard from health boards about how maintaining a focus on wellbeing has aided them in those efforts. During an evidence session, Robin McNaught, who is the director of finance and e-health at the State Hospitals Board for Scotland, spoke about the positive impact of peer support and induction on the recruitment and retention of new staff. He described the focus on the development of a peer support network, both clinical and non-clinical, throughout the board. The board has also delivered training sessions on peer support this year. A number of staff are now trained as peer support workers and they can provide dedicated support to new staff.

At a later committee evidence session, I asked representatives of NHS Fife, NHS Grampian and NHS Lothian whether they had considered setting up similar networks. They confirmed that they have rolled out peer support models across their organisations, as well as wellbeing initiatives such as psychological first aid and speak up ambassadors.

I would be interested to hear from the cabinet secretary in his closing speech how the Government can support all health boards to roll out such peer support schemes where they are not already in place. I would also be grateful for an update on the implementation of safe staffing legislation, as that will also help to reduce the pressure on staff.

We must not underestimate the challenges of working through the backlogs in care. While that work is on-going, we must be keenly aware of the extra pressure and stress that it causes for staff, patients and their loved ones, and we must do everything in our power to alleviate that.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I appreciate the opportunity to speak in the debate because it is only the third time that I have been able to contribute to a debate on a health motion. It is, however, disappointing to be repeating myself about the pitiful record of the SNP-Green Government when it comes to Scotland’s failing health service, especially with regard to mental health provision for our children and young people.

Many care-experienced children are likely to suffer from mental health issues, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, depression and eating disorders, and it is to that part of the Conservative amendment that I want to draw the attention of Parliament, because it is imperative that we stop looking at those situations in isolation.

Both my daughters have experience of the aforementioned mental health issues. For most of their adolescence, they had to contend with extreme anxiety, which manifested itself in paralysing fear and insomnia, difficulty in maintaining focus, control practices in relation to food, and periods of debilitating depression. They are not alone in their experience.

Time and again, we stand in the chamber and voice our collective backing for the Promise, and we regularly renew our commitment to changing the lives of care-experienced children, but that is impossible if we do not recognise the connection between that and the mental health of our young people.

I want to draw members’ attention to the statistics for NHS Forth Valley, which is in my region, especially those for child and adolescent mental health services waiting times. Nearly two thirds of young people in the NHS Forth Valley area who are struggling with their mental health are not being seen within the target time. Figures show that NHS Forth Valley has missed a key child mental health waiting time target. Between January and March 2023, only 42 per cent of patients began treatment within 18 weeks, which is absolutely disgusting when we consider that the target is 90 per cent. Fewer than half of our local young people are being seen within the allocated time frame. Most shocking of all is that half of the referrals for CAMHS in the area were rejected altogether: 110 young people in a single month found themselves without support.

No one but SNP ministers is creating those targets for the Scottish Government. It makes me wonder whether the targets are based on any tangible analyses or are simply plucked out of thin air for a hashtag and a headline. Time and again, we are told of the work that is being done by the SNP-Green Scottish Government to reduce waiting times, but nothing is happening. We hear chants ad nauseam about increased spending per head of population, but what are we actually seeing for that additional spending? Surely 10 per cent extra spending should at least result in a 10 per cent increase in service provision. Of course, while all that goes on, our young people with mental health issues have nothing to show for that headline-grabbing funding and are left living through mental and emotional hell.

The final area that I wish to highlight concerns the pandemic and the consequences of locking down our young people. Our response to the pandemic has had a massive detrimental effect on our young people and we have barely begun to scratch the surface of the on-going problems that it will cause their generation. Furthermore, we are missing targets now, but the situation is surely going to get worse.

However, the pandemic was a massive magnifying glass for scrutinising every one of our processes: businesses and all levels of government alike were put under a microscope and analysed. The pandemic highlighted where society was working just as much as it highlighted where it was not.

If we only, and blindly, use our current situation as an excuse for recovery delay, we are missing the opportunity to fix what was wrong in the first place and we do a disservice to the people whom we serve—especially in terms of the on-going mental health of Scotland’s children.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

The Scottish Government is determined to reduce waiting times across all health specialties. Within the past seven days alone, the health secretary has announced funding for a new national digital dermatology programme, which could reduce demand for out-patient appointments in dermatology—one of the biggest out-patient specialties in Scotland—by up to 50 per cent.

In addition to that, on Monday in Inverness the First Minister opened Scotland’s third national treatment centre. The extra capacity that it has created will help to reduce NHS waiting lists that have built up during the pandemic, and the two further NTCs that are set to open this year will help to further that aim.

Although there is still more to do, since targets were announced last July such actions have resulted in a continued reduction in long waits of over 18 months, as well as a significant reduction in long waits of over two years.

The Labour motion shows us that that party has its head in the sand and demonstrates how little it understands the challenges that are faced by our NHS—not only in Scotland but across all the UK nations. There is no recognition or acknowledgement in it of the biggest challenge that the NHS has faced in its almost 75 years of existence: that is, the Covid-19 pandemic.

Scottish Labour might not wish to accept that fact coming from SNP members, but it should listen to Welsh Labour’s First Minister, who recently said:

“The health services are trying to cope with the impact of the coronavirus, and they are also trying to re-establish everything else that is important in those services.”

Quite evidently, health services across the four nations and, indeed, internationally, are dealing with the effects of the pandemic on waiting times.

I also find it telling that, in its motion, Labour refers to use of private healthcare, which—although Labour would have us believe otherwise—is not unique to Scotland but affects health services across the UK. The rate of people who are self-funding for private in-patient day-case care in England is 19.9 per cent higher than it is in Scotland. In Wales, where Labour has been in charge of the health service for about 25 years, the rate is an eye-watering 120 percent higher than it is in Scotland. Labour’s UK shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, recently said that

“Labour would use the spare capacity in the private sector to get patients seen faster”.

Another area in which some self-reflection from Labour would not go amiss is Brexit, which it now fully supports despite the impact that it is having on recruiting and retaining NHS staff. Although NHS staffing is up to historically high levels under this Scottish Government, we know that workers from overseas have long been an important part of our health and care workforce, and that international recruitment is vital to addressing staffing shortages in the NHS. Since Brexit, the number of new international nurse registrants from inside the European Union has fallen dramatically. Friends and colleagues have returned to their EU home countries, and other people who might have considered a new life here have decided not to come to the UK. That is evidenced in Nursing and Midwifery Council registration data from the past few years, so it is fact, rather than opinion.

As a country, we need to find a way of ensuring that we have an immigration system that is not just humane but meets our social and economic needs.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The member is about to conclude.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

It is clear that Scotland will not find either of those things as part of the Westminster system of Government. The route to both is Scotland becoming an independent country.

Challenges remain, and there are still unacceptable waits in some specialties, but the Scottish Government remains committed to delivering sustained improvement and year-on-year reductions in waiting times, through maximising capacity across Scotland, enhancing regional and national working, and redesigning care services.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We move to closing speeches. I call Craig Hoy to wind up the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I would like to say that what the SNP has lacked in its number of contributions today, it made up for in quality, but those were some of the worst and most delusional speeches that I have heard since coming into this Parliament. It is no surprise that only four back-bench SNP members were in the chamber when the cabinet secretary started her speech. I do not know where the others were—perhaps they were down at the florists—but they were clearly not here.

The debate has exposed a shameful record of this Government on the NHS. There are 7,000 unfilled vacancies in our health service. Since the beginning of this parliamentary session, more than 800,000 people have waited more than four hours at our overstretched accident and emergency departments. In my region, more and more patients are not being seen within the four-hour target at A and E rooms in the Borders and Lothian—more than ever before. At the start of this year, as many as three in seven patients waited in accident and emergency rooms in the Borders and Lothian for longer than four hours. That number is, frankly, unacceptable.

In East Lothian, pressure on the NHS has been mounting due to underfunding of community treatment and care services by the Scottish Government, which has led to closure or suspension of some vital services. At the Edington cottage hospital in North Berwick, the minor injuries clinic has closed and in-patient beds have been removed. That is a monument to ministerial inaction.

The arteries of our social care system are clogged to a critical point, which is having an impact across our NHS and in primary care. Daily, those capacity issues are leading to delays in discharging patients from hospital, as Carol Mochan said. In February alone, 51,732 bed days were lost because of patients waiting to be discharged. That is a shocking increase of 4,019 lost bed days on the figure for February last year.

Therefore, post-pandemic the position is getting worse. Delayed discharges have cost our NHS more than £1.2 billion in the past decade of SNP rule, which is contributing to longer waiting times throughout our NHS. As Jackie Baillie said, that is simply not good enough. We are witnessing severe waiting times across Scotland’s health service.

Perhaps in closing the cabinet secretary might answer the question that I would have asked, had he taken my intervention, which was whether he will say sorry to our constituents, some of whom are elderly, frail and living in pain and are having to borrow money from their children or grandchildren for treatment that they deem to be essential but that would not come quickly enough.

We see some of the longest waiting times in the diagnostic arena, where there is an average wait of 63 days for out-patient neurosurgery, 70 days for respiratory medicine and oral surgery, and 98 days for neurology patients.

Targets were set, targets have been missed and all Government credibility is lost. What do we get from the SNP Government? We get a flimsy recovery plan from a flimsy First Minister—a First Minister who is so flimsy that he is not willing to stand up to his predecessor.

We should all be worried about the state that the NHS is in today under the SNP. In concluding today’s debate, I echo the calls of my colleagues for better funding and support and for urgent action. We have a Government that has lost control of our NHS and social care system right across Scotland. It is an incompetent SNP Government that is more worried now about search warrants than about waiting times, and it is a Government that has mismanaged the NHS workforce.

This SNP Government is forcing patients, young and old, to live in pain. It is a Government that, ultimately, is now more focused on dividing our country than it is on healing its people.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

My apologies that, in the short time that is available to me, I will not be able to respond to many of the points that members have raised.

I am sure that everyone in the chamber would recognise that our NHS has gone through a major challenge over the past few years, and it would be disingenuous to pretend otherwise. For those who do not want to believe me, they have only to look at the published report from Audit Scotland, which recognises the significant challenge that NHS Scotland is facing as a result of the challenges during the pandemic and Brexit. They have only to look at the National Audit Office’s report on NHS England, which states that

“activity ... has continued to lag behind the pre-pandemic level and is well below planned trajectory”,

and that there are

“significant threats to the recovery”.

In Wales, Audit Wales has said the same thing. It has said that

“Whole system change is overdue”,

and it has talked about the challenges in the system.

Therefore, all parts of the NHS are facing significant challenges, and it will take time to make sure that we are able to address that recovery, which is exactly what our NHS recovery plan is doing. We can see the progress that it is making on waiting lists.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The recovery plan that your Government produced was after the pandemic and after Brexit. Did you not take account of those things? Frankly, the recovery plan is failing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You need to speak through the chair.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The plan took those factors into account, but they are all still impacting our NHS, which is an important point to be recognised. Ms Baillie said that the targets that we set were to “eradicate” the long waits. Actually, the targets were to do that across the majority of specialties, and we are seeing good progress on that.

Then we had the brass neck of Tory members on several occasions talking about standing up for the founding principles of our NHS, when they are rapidly going through the process of privatising the NHS in England as quickly as they can to keep the fat cats and their back benchers happy while they take money from private healthcare companies. Therefore, it is a bit rich listening to anybody from the Conservative Party talk about the founding principles of the NHS, given that it abandoned them many years ago and is rapidly selling it off to its pals in the private sector as quickly as it can. [

Interruption

.]

A number of important points were raised—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Excuse me, cabinet secretary—please resume your seat for a second.

I am being talked at by members who are remaining in a sedentary position. That is not acceptable. If members have something to say, they need to intervene and say it. If not, please let the member who has the floor continue to speak.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I want to pick up on a couple of issues that have been raised. Jackie Baillie spoke about orthopaedics. I hope that I will not disappoint her when I tell her that I am ahead of the game on that issue—I have already started work to consider how we can take further action on orthopaedics.

Jackie Baillie also mentioned Ms Murray's father, who is waiting for treatment presently. I do not know the details of that case, but if the member passes those on, I would be more than happy to have that matter looked into as well.

Gillian Mackay raised an important point about the safe staffing legislation. We are making steady progress with that. I had a good meeting with the Royal College of Nursing earlier this week, when we discussed the progress that we are making in the working groups that are taking forward some of the work on the associated guidance for that legislation for next year. I hope that we will continue to make progress with that.

Presiding Officer, I am very conscious of time. In drawing my remarks to a close, I apologise for being unable to respond to many of the points that members have raised in the time that is available to me. I must say to Mr Hoy that some of those are worth more than others.

I will do everything that I can, as the health secretary, to continue to support our NHS staff in the NHS’s recovery, and to protect it from those who would seek to undermine it—and particularly from those on the Conservative benches, who have a track record of trying to undermine our NHS through privatisation and choking off its funding where they can.

One thing that the people of Scotland can be sure of is that this SNP Government is completely committed to an NHS in the public sector’s hands, delivering for the people of Scotland.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

It is

a pleasure to close this debate on the Labour motion on NHS waiting times.

T

he Government seems oblivious to the fact that we are holding it to account for tests that it set itself after Brexit and after the Covid-19 pandemic. We do not dispute that those are hugely challenging events and that they continue to exert an impact, but any credible plan would have accounted for that variability and stress, and it would have taken countermeasures and actions accordingly. We just have not seen a dynamic or invigorating approach from the Government to try to get on top of the issue; nor have we seen the degree of honesty that we should have from any responsible Government.

This is not simply an abstract, technocratic exercise; we all have skin in the game. One in seven Scots—these are our neighbours, our family members and our friends; it could be one of us—are at the mercy of a system that is in serious distress. Therefore, it was essential that the motion was brought to the chamber for debate today.

I had hoped that members on the Government benches would have treated the motion with that degree of seriousness. However, I have been very disappointed at the tone that has been adopted. We brought the motion in the spirit of collegiality and in the spirit of trying to come together to resolve a common challenge that our country faces and that one of the most precious institutions that our country has ever built faces.

Public Health Scotland data has shown that 31,498 patients are still waiting more than one year for an out-patient appointment. That is completely unacceptable. As we have heard already from colleagues, 18,000 of our fellow citizens have perished waiting on treatment. That is a scandal, and that cannot be treated with the glibness that it has been in the chamber today.

Many members have referred to the structural and systemic issues that our NHS faces. I think that Dr Gulhane mentioned that there is an issue with delayed discharge and that patient flow is critical to achieving efficient systems. That is a fair observation, and it is something that the Government needs to better understand.

Simply maintaining the status quo is not a neutral option, because people are paying the price for that. We have seen the data that shows that 6,895 people face a wait of more than two years for routine surgery. That is two years in agony, two years being disabled and two years being unable to contribute or care for their relatives. That is just not acceptable, and it casts a very dark shadow over our country. It impacts on all sorts of things, including our economic capacity. It introduces lifelong costs and so ends up being a false economy, as people face lifelong disabilities.

The member for Coatbridge and Chryston referred to A and E departments, but that was a red herring. This is stuff that took place when I was still at school. The reality is that this Government has been in power for my entire adult life, and it is about time that it took responsibility for its own actions in government. This continuing nonsense about things that took place a generation ago is simply not acceptable. The reality is that these decisions were taken on this Government’s watch, and it should have the intellectual and moral honesty to take responsibility for them.

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

What I had wanted to say in my intervention on Mr MacGregor, if he had taken it, was that this is not about the political bubble. This week, I have been speaking to young people in Lanarkshire who have come here from Ukraine seeking sanctuary. They said to me that it is easier and quicker for them to get healthcare by travelling back to Ukraine than it is to get it in Lanarkshire or elsewhere in central Scotland. That is the reality that we are facing.

What does my colleague say to that? I think that people in Scotland expect us to have very strong responses—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Paul Sweeney, please.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

It is absolutely critical. Every member will have received correspondence of that kind, whether it is from new Scots or people who have lived here their entire lives.

One constituent of mine was unable to work until he received a series of tests on his heart. He was out of work for almost a year while he waited on an appointment. When it was chased up for him, it transpired that his referral had never been made. That is shocking.

Ms Mackay, the Green member for Central Scotland, mentioned that waiting well initiatives are taking place. We commend and encourage those, and I thought that the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee heard great evidence on them, but the reality is that they are clearly not working. In every instance that they fail, the cabinet secretary must have a report on his desk so that he can understand the root cause of what went wrong and ensure that resilient measures are put in place to correct it.

We have had many other cases. Another constituent of mine was told in 2020 that she needed knee surgery—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Sweeney, you will need to bring your remarks to a close, please.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

—and then was told in 2022 that she might need to wait for another two years for treatment. The orthopaedic recovery plan is to be commended, but that case clearly points to a wider policy failure.

In reality, although we recognise that the Government is facing challenges, we are holding it to account on its own tests, which are set according to the constraints that it has already identified. There is not an excuse. The Government needs to get to grips with the crisis that is engulfing our national health service, or we risk losing it for ever.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

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

Caledonian MacBrayne Services (Resilience Fund)

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-09463, in the name of Michael Marra, on a resilience fund for CalMac disruption. I would be grateful if members who wish to speak in the debate were to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The motion that we have put forward

has a simple ask of this Government: to establish a resilience fund for businesses that are affected by the disruption to and withdrawal of ferry services. How Green and Scottish National Party members vote at decision time will be a clear signal of whether they accept responsibility for their catastrophic failure of our island communities and whether they will take a small action to begin to make amends. The failure has been 16 years in the making, but it is destroying livelihoods and communities today.

The figures are damning. From May 2022 to April 2023, the Mallaig-Lochboisdale route suffered 79 diverted sailings, 142 late sailings and 296 cancelled ferries. More than one in four of all scheduled sailings never left the harbour. With news of yet more cancellations this month, the situation is, to quote Alasdair Allan MSP, “abysmal”.

The consequences of those failures are devastating for islanders. Estimates are that local businesses are losing close to £50,000 per day. In an already difficult climate of high energy and fuel costs, coupled with soaring inflation, businesses cannot afford further financial hardship.

Between October 2021 and March 2023, CalMac paid £4.54 million in financial penalties. Where did that go?

The First Minister said last week that the money was

“reinvested back into the resilience of the network.”—[

Official Report

, 8 June 2023; c 10.]

The Government’s amendment reiterates that claim. However, what is the resilience that it speaks of? Hardly a week goes by without further announcements of delays and cancellations, as the network rusts and breaks and two ferries sit in port under construction in the west of Scotland. The Government’s incompetent approach is not arresting decline or incentivising better performance; it is doing precisely the opposite. CalMac bosses know that the money is being shuffled around in yet another SNP accountancy trick.

In truth, island residents and business owners are the only ones to experience a true financial penalty, as their livelihoods are destroyed. The idea of a resilience fund did not originate from members on the Labour benches; it began in our island communities when residents of South Uist gathered in droves to protest about the withdrawal of yet more ferry services. Scottish Labour has spoken with business owners across the Western Isles and their position could not be clearer. One business owner told us that the impact on her business was “catastrophic” and

“far exceeds the impact from the global pandemic”.

With this Government, it is, I am afraid, a case of out of sight, out of mind. If 185,000 people, or a third of Edinburgh’s population, were protesting outside the Parliament now, the Government would have to listen but, when a third of South Uist’s population turn out to protest, the Government pays no heed whatsoever. It is no wonder that the owner of a catering company in South Uist told us:

“we have lost all faith in the Scottish Government to be able to improve the situation”.

That loss of faith in Government did not happen overnight. It is the result of 16 years of wilful neglect by the SNP Government, which leaves our islands facing an existential threat. That incompetence has consequences. Under the SNP, the vital infrastructure of Scotland’s ferry services is reaching collapse. The litany of policy failures—on infrastructure, connectivity, housing, education, fishing and more—is leading to an exodus from our islands, particularly of young people who see no option for their future in the place that they call home.

The research paper “The Gaelic Crisis in the Vernacular Community”, which was published in 2020, issued stark warnings about the future viability of the Gaelic language and culture beyond the next 10 years, in the face of an ageing population in island communities. The paper highlighted that

“The retention of young people and young families willing to contribute to community vitality will be central to any credible strategy of revitalisation.”

How can we expect young people to stay in areas where they will be increasingly isolated and financially penalised?

The very existence of Scotland’s ancient language and culture relies on the economic viability of our island communities, but today it is abundantly clear that the SNP cannot be trusted with the protection of Scotland and of who we are and where we come from. The SNP is eternally distracted, is obsessed with press over policy and dissembling over delivery, and has utterly failed our islanders.

Are SNP and Green members listening? Have they heard the cries of despair from our communities who rely on these services? I see some members in the chamber who represent those communities directly. Will they heed those calls for help? Given the Government’s position today, those members must put aside blind loyalty to the amendment that the Government has lodged and loyalty to a failing incompetent leadership and do right by their constituents. Have you heard your constituents’ voices and will you act?

I move,

That the Parliament instructs the Scottish Government to establish a resilience fund for businesses adversely affected by Caledonian MacBrayne disruption and withdrawal of services, utilising funds obtained from penalties imposed on Caledonian MacBrayne for breaches of its contract with Transport Scotland.

The Presiding Officer

I call Màiri McAllan to speak to and move amendment S6M-09463.2.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Before beginning, I would like to welcome Fiona Hyslop to her new post. She brings an enormous amount of experience to the role, and I am really pleased to be working with her as team transport.

On the matters at hand, I want to begin with a clear and unequivocal acknowledgement of the importance of the matters that are being debated today. For Scotland’s island communities, ferries are not just a mode of transport; they are lifeline services that bring food and vital supplies and that support economic activity. It follows, then, that the issue is not just about the improvement of transport service performance; it is about delivering the confidence that is needed to sustain our island populations and ensure that people and businesses can thrive. Insofar as Michael Mara rehearsed those points, I agree with him.

However, as I said in the chamber recently, following the protests on South Uist, I will not prevaricate about the strain that is currently being felt in the network. On-going technical issues with vessels have resulted in delays to the annual overhaul programme, and the cancellation of sailings has been the result. Regrettably, some communities have been more impacted than others. I absolutely recognise the need to improve CalMac’s reliability and rebuild confidence in services.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I will give way briefly, but I have a lot that I would like to get through.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Does the cabinet secretary accept that other fleets of similar vintages operate with much greater resilience than is shown in the CalMac fleet? Why is there not a proper preventative maintenance system in place to ensure greater resilience in the fleet?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Mr Sweeney’s comments come on the back of my full recognition of the need to improve CalMac’s reliability and rebuild confidence in the fleet, so that should let him know that, to some extent, I agree that there is work to be done.

I deeply regret that the needs of island communities have not always been met by CalMac services and that CalMac’s communications have not always been sufficient or timeous. However, I do not want to just regret; I want to have a plan of action for how the Government can do all that we can, all that is practicable and all that is in our gift to bolster the reliability of the network.

As I see it, there are two principal parts to that. First, there is the action that we can take in the here and now to alleviate disruption in what is undeniably a period of pressure. Secondly, the Government should make that period of pressure as short as possible by bolstering and adding to the number of vessels in the fleet. I will use my time today to set out what the Government is doing against both those objectives.

In relation to the here and now, I met the chief executive of CalMac last week. My first question to the CalMac management was how they intended to respond to the protests on South Uist, because, as politicians, we all know that it is essential that there is communication and a presence in communities.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

I think that members are interested in how the Government, rather than CalMac, will respond to the demonstrations on South Uist.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I have just started to address the two aspects of the Government’s plan and to set out what we will do, in our gift, to address the issue. I am not at all shying away from the actions that the Government needs to take, and I am happy to narrate them now.

On the back of that meeting, I was very pleased that Mr Drummond visited South Uist and met residents. That followed a similar visit from the former transport minister in late May and a visit that the new transport minister made recently in her capacity as a committee member. Indeed, I expect to make similar visits over the summer.

As well as communication, CalMac management and I discussed the route prioritisation matrix that CalMac uses to assess options to maintain lifeline connections when there is disruption in the network. I asked CalMac to urgently consider that route prioritisation matrix to ensure that it is fit for purpose and capable of taking into account cumulative impacts on fragile island communities. I expect the outcome of that consideration in short order.

This morning, I was pleased to meet the ferries community board, which includes community representatives from our islands and is, in my view, utterly invaluable as a source of lived experience. I strongly believe that CalMac and the Scottish Government should listen carefully to what those people have to say—I certainly intend to do that.

That is the response that we are undertaking in the here and now, but the motion is about compensation.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am afraid that I do not have time—I am exceptionally short on time.

The contract that we have in place with CalMac allows us to make penalty deductions when performance measures are not met. Through that contract, penalties of between £1 million and £3 million per year have been recovered. Michael Marra questioned where that funding has been directed. He need only look at the MV Alfred, which is currently providing resilience on the Arran route. That cost £9 million, which was funded in part by those deductions. That ferry is providing resilience in the fleet, and I understand that that is exactly what islanders want most of all.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am very conscious of time.

The Presiding Officer

I must ask the cabinet secretary to conclude. We are very tight for time.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I will leave it there. I hope that my colleague the Minister for Small Business, Innovation and Trade will be able to cover any other points.

I move amendment S6M-09463.2, to leave out from “instructs” to end and insert:

“recognises the significant impact that delays and disruption to ferry services have regrettably had on Scotland’s island communities and businesses; acknowledges that some island communities have been particularly badly affected, and also acknowledges the frustration felt by island communities; believes that the Scottish Government must continue to explore all practicable options to support island communities; agrees that the Scottish Government should redouble its efforts to work with operators and CMAL to improve reliability, resilience and confidence across networks and services, and address concerns that have been raised around CalMac’s route prioritisation matrix to ensure that it is reviewed, with input from communities, and that it considers the economic impact to fragile island communities; notes that all penalty deductions from CalMac made in relation to failures on the network are used to support resilience and help reduce disruption, for example, by helping to partly fund the cost of the charter of MV Alfred, and believes that accelerating the replacement of major vessels in the ferry fleet must be the priority in order to provide the ferry services that island communities need.”

The Presiding Officer

I call Graham Simpson to speak to and move amendment S6M-09463.1.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am afraid that I did not hear any kind of plan there.

I thank Labour for bringing the debate to the chamber; w

e will support its motion, of course.

In March, I welcomed Kevin Stewart to his new role as transport minister—Presiding Officer, I am getting a bit of an echo when I speak.

The Presiding Officer

I am certainly content with what I can hear; the sound is audible.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Okay, I will carry on.

Mr Stewart was just minutes into the job when I asked him an urgent question about what the Government was doing to restore ferry services between Mallaig, Oban and Lochboisdale in South Uist, in light of the announcement that the services were to be withdrawn from 5 April to 13 May.

He talked about recognising the challenges that were faced and said that the islands remained open for business. I then asked him whether he would look at a compensation scheme and reduced fares for islanders. He said that he would be speaking to CalMac that day and would “seek mitigations” and “solutions”.

Alasdair Allan had another go on the idea of a business resilience fund and did slightly better: the minister said that he would

“need to consider it further”—[

Official Report

, 30 March 2023; c 60.]

which is not quite a commitment.

Douglas Ross raised exactly the same issue last week because, three months on, things are no better. In fact, they are worse, with sailings of the MV Lord of the Isles between Mallaig and Lochboisdale cancelled until the end of June. As we have heard, locals who have protested in their hundreds have said that CalMac is ushering in “modern day Highland clearances”.

CalMac uses something that is called a matrix to decide which services to run when there are problems, which is quite a lot of the time. John Daniel Peteranna of the South Uist business ferry impact group, which organised the demonstration, said of the matrix that

“It is as vague and woolly as you can get and that is what they use to make decisions. It is hot air. We think it is commercially better for them to do this ...

The matrix should look at the cultural and economic impact but I cannot make any sense of the rubbish that has been written. We need an explanation of what it means ... It is like the Highland Clearances again.”

Robbie Drummond, who is CalMac’s chief executive, has been meeting islanders this week. Mr Drummond

had a taste of what they are going through when he reportedly could not get his car on the ferry and travelled a very long way round to get there—i

f it had been Lorna Slater, she would of course have just chartered a boat. Mr Drummond has promised a review of the matrix; we have heard today that the cabinet secretary will do the same.

The upshot is this: people on the islands are suffering because of mismanagement of our ferries under the SNP. The Government owns Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd, which buys the boats and owns them; it also owns CalMac, which runs the ferries. Sitting above them is Transport Scotland and whoever is minister of the day. The Government even owns the yard that is building two new ferries—eventually. There is no one else to blame; the Government is responsible. Therefore, when people are out of pocket because of it, it should compensate them—it really is that simple.

Right now, island life is being made a misery, so the Government’s amendment is quite shameful; it removes all mention of a compensation scheme. Any islander watching today will be furious; they are being let down and now, they are being ignored. I ask members to support my amendment and reject the Government’s.

I move amendment S6M-09463.1, to insert at end:

“; notes the anger expressed by islanders at repeated disruption, which is impacting on business and day-to-day life; calls on the Scottish Government to establish the fund, which should be permanent, without delay, and welcomes the commitment by CalMac to review its route scoring matrix.”

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

I am pleased to note that transport has been restored to Cabinet level; it should never have been removed. I take this opportunity to welcome Fiona Hyslop to her new role as transport minister.

I thank Michael Marra for bringing this important debate and motion to the chamber. Scottish Liberal Democrats will support the motion at decision time, as well as the Conservative Party amendment. It is the right thing to do to compensate islanders who have been left high and dry as a consequence of their lifeline ferry service failing to meet their needs. The motion calls for resilience funding for compensation, to come from

“penalties imposed on Caledonian MacBrayne for breaches of its contract with Transport Scotland.”

The hundreds of people in South Uist protesting earlier this month about CalMac’s decision to cancel most ferry sailings to Mallaig for the reminder of June will be a lasting image of the frustration at the Scottish Government’s self-inflicted ferry fiasco. The thinking seems to be that the impact can be measured in numbers. The logic seems to be that it is a small community, so there will be small impact. In fact, the opposite is true, because there is a disproportionately large impact on smaller communities: the missed hospital appointments, missed weddings and missed funerals and the loss of income for accommodation providers—when bookings are cancelled because visitors cannot get to the islands—and for retailers who have no stock. It is a threat to the island way of life.

I welcome reports that CalMac will review its route prioritisation matrix, but the cynic in me suggests that it is doing so now only because the islanders’ demonstration hit national headlines. There is much that must be done to repair the damage and loss of trust. As Michael Marra observed, the hundreds of people who protested in South Uist would equate to 180,000 people in Edinburgh. If comparable numbers of cars were parked nose to tail to show disappointment at transport decisions that affected people’s lives in the capital, the Government would not be able to ignore the chaos.

The scale of protests in South Uist shows the strength of feeling about being isolated—even trapped—the sense of injustice on the part of businesses that face losses and the anger that is felt about the fact that the company at the heart of these issues is getting yet more taxpayer cash. There is a sense that the Scottish Government and Transport Scotland do not fully understand the needs of islanders, the critical need for connectivity and the interdependency.

The SNP-Green Government needs to look beyond the central belt. Island communities feel as though they have been abandoned. Depopulation is a serious concern in Scotland’s islands and rural areas. The handling of the ferry fiasco and the lack of accountability on the part of the Government show that the concerns of islanders are distant to ministers. We face the collapse of communities in island areas if ferries are not operating and service is not improved.

The response to the situation has shown that the Government’s response to depopulation is lip service at best. What is needed is long-term thinking about the ferry fleet capacity and resilience, a rolling plan for the replacement of old ferries, innovation in the build and other needed functions and a move away from thinking that the impacts on island populations will be small. Islands and those who live on them are very much part of Scotland, geographically, culturally and socially. Islanders are no less important than those who live on mainland Scotland. It is critical that we get transport connectivity right, whether that is ferries, buses or—dare I say it?—tunnels, and everything else will fall into place.

The Presiding Officer

We move to the open debate.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

I welcome this important debate and I speak in support of my Labour colleague Michael Marra’s motion.

As Michael Marra said, Scotland’s islanders are right to be angry, dismayed and frustrated, because they simply do not have the ferry service that they need or deserve. They have been failed and they have been let down. Given that fact and the recent and damaging disruption to island businesses in particular, it is only right that those businesses receive the compensation that they need and deserve.

It is little wonder that we have seen protests recently on South Uist, and we know that the same anger and frustration is felt in other islands across Scotland, including in Arran in my West Scotland region. I have spoken to businesses, particularly food producers, who are in despair. Delays to ferries cost them thousands of pounds a day and could cost jobs in the long term.

Let us not talk around the key issue behind why we are here. The number 1 reason—the main reason by far—why islanders do not have a reliable ferry service is that CalMac does not have a reliable ferry fleet. In addition to being unreliable, it is an ageing fleet: 38 per cent of vessels are more than 30 years old and over the recommended lifespan for a ferry.

That flies in the face of the First Minister’s claim last week about the SNP’s investment in ferries. Let us look at the outcomes. Over the SNP’s time in office, only six ferries have been built—six in 16 years. Compare that with the 10 ferries that were built by the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Government in half that time—10 in eight years. Even Margaret Thatcher’s Government built more new CalMac ferries than this Government has. Its record is shameful.

There is a plenty of blame to go round for the whole ferries fiasco, but the Scottish Government cannot blame anyone else for its abject failure to provide new ferries. It cannot blame CalMac, it certainly cannot blame the Ferguson’s workforce and it cannot blame the previous Government for its failure to provide decent ferries for our islands.

Given that this is the Government’s fault, the least that it could do now is adequately compensate island businesses whose futures are at real risk. It is time for the Government to take responsibility. I say that because it appears, day in, day out, that the Government is desperate not to take responsibility but to deflect blame elsewhere.

To be clear, CMAL and CalMac are not entirely blameless, but it is not their job, and it is certainly not the job of their workers when dealing with angry passengers, to take the flak for the Government’s overall procurement failure. The project Neptune report has been part of the deflection strategy. We need to look at how governance and structures best work and how we best run our ferries, but that cannot, and must not, distract us from the fact that the Government has not built enough ferries.

One clear commitment in relation to project Neptune from the former transport minister was to rule out privatisation. It is hard to see how the current situation could be made worse, but the privatisation of CalMac would do that. That should also be ruled out by the new transport minister.

On taking responsibility, I wish the new transport minister, Fiona Hyslop, and the new transport secretary, Màiri McAllan, well, as I do Kevin Stewart. However, I say to them what I said to Neil Gray last week: the ministerial merry-go-round needs to stop. There was a time when ministers could not get down to Ferguson’s quick enough for a photo op; now, ministers cannot wait to get ferries out of their portfolio and to buy themselves time with nice platitudes.

Real responsibility would be a Government minister standing up in the chamber, staking their reputation on fixing this mess and saying that they will not leave until the job is done. Because of the current fiasco, we face a situation in which our ferry network is in crisis and we are having to build ferries in Turkey. We are also—

The Presiding Officer

We are very tight for time, Mr Bibby, so I must ask you to conclude.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Okay.

In closing, I say that warm words from the Government mean nothing and do nothing for island communities, unless the Government is willing to put its money where its mouth is and establish—

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr Bibby.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

—

a proper resilience fund to compensate businesses.

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

We all know about, and we have quite rightly rehearsed today, the problems facing the CalMac network. There are not enough ships. The ships that are there are ageing. They are breaking down more often, and those repairs are taking longer. CalMac, which was once very much considered part of the fabric of life in the islands, risks increasingly being seen by islanders as remote and bureaucratic.

Continuing disruption has hit many businesses in my constituency hard, nowhere more so—I should say—than in Uist. Lochboisdale is not typically a place where you will see protests and mass demonstrations. As others have pointed out, the fact that one third of the island’s resident population came out to demonstrate against the recent complete withdrawal of the ferry service says much about the pain that is being felt there.

South Uist has, in fact, regularly suffered more from service disruption than anywhere else on the Clyde and Hebrides network. Over the course of a year, there were 225 cancelled sailings versus 479 that operated. That is an astonishingly high cancellation rate, and it is easily higher than the rate anywhere else on the network. Winter was particularly bad, with only a quarter of scheduled sailings operating between November and March.

Lifeline services should, in the first instance, serve island communities. I carefully preface my next remark by acknowledging that every island in Scotland needs a good ferry service. However, while other islands with smaller populations get two or even four-vessel services, the whole string of islands from Eriskay to Berneray has to share half of a single ferry between North Uist and Skye at the moment.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I hear what Alasdair Allan says about islands requiring ferries and how they differ in their capacities, but does he agree that one of the most invidious things about this crisis is the fact that islands are sometimes pitted against each other and that we have negativity—almost competition—between islands, which should never happen?

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

I can identify with what Donald Cameron said, which is why I tried to phrase my remarks carefully. No, we should not be in a position where islands are in competition with each other; of course, when there are not enough ships, they inevitably are. I point to the particular situation in South Uist and I hope that my remarks are clear about what they have been suffering.

The focus on passenger numbers to the detriment of all other considerations is, I believe, leading those who operate ferry services to drift from their core purpose. That is how we get to a route prioritisation matrix that was devised without any input from communities, and which strips an island of all its ferry services for the whole month of June.

I therefore welcome the cabinet secretary’s remarks, in which she is—it would seem—willing to question that matrix. There is no lack of evidence for the economic damage that is being caused. One example that was reported by Business Gateway in Uist detailed a 40 per cent drop in bookings for accommodation providers. Hauliers, who are not supported through compensation from CalMac, have frequently—

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the member give way?

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

I must make progress now.

Hauliers have frequently faced delay and rerouting over hundreds of miles. Time-critical shellfish exports have sometimes not been able to reach European markets timeously.

Even before the latest disruption in Uist, businesses had approached me to say that they were not convinced that they could survive this year as a result of these issues. Of course, the complete withdrawal of the ferry service from South Uist makes the situation even more critical.

The Scottish Government has rightly made ensuring a reliable ferry service a priority. We all want to see the new Islay class vessels, as well as those at Port Glasgow, come into service, but—as I hope that I have illustrated—there are businesses across Uist that cannot afford to wait. What is happening in Uist is in a different league from what is happening in many other places.

The Government’s amendment clearly recognises—

The Presiding Officer

I must ask you to conclude, Mr Allan. I am afraid that we have no extra time this afternoon.

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

I conclude there, and I recognise that the Government amendment goes some way—in fact, a great deal of the way—towards acknowledging those problems, which are very real.