Scottish Parliament, 16 November 2023

255 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good morning. The first item of business is general question time. As ever, I would appreciate succinct questions and answers to allow as many members to get in as possible.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Medication Shortages

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medication shortages, as referred to in the national patient safety alert of 27 September. (S6O-02736)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

It is anticipated that the global shortage of medicines used to treat ADHD will be resolved by the end of December. The shortages are caused by a combination of manufacturing issues and an increase in demand. The pricing and supply of medicines is a reserved matter for the United Kingdom Government, and we continue to engage with that Government.

The Scottish Government recognises the impact of the global shortages on people living with ADHD and their families. NHS Scotland has robust systems in place to manage medicine shortages when they arise. Anyone affected by the issue should speak to their clinical team.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I remind members of my ADHD diagnosis and the fact that I take medication for my ADHD.

This situation has caused a huge amount of anxiety. A diagnosis and medication are what bring order to what have previously been chaotic and troubled lives for many. Although it is good to hear that the minister expects the situation to resolve itself in December, what clarity does she have on that? Critically, what practical information is being given to people? I do not know whether I should be ordering more medication, because there is advice not to stockpile. Most critically, for people on lisdexamphetamine, there are serious medical consequences if they suddenly stop taking their medication. Have people on lisdexamphetamine been written to, and is medical supervision and assistance being provided to them?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I absolutely appreciate the impact that the situation is having on individuals who require this medicine and on their families.

I spoke with my officials yesterday to confirm the timeframe, and that is the timeframe that they confirmed. Earlier in November, the Scottish Government held an extraordinary meeting of child and adolescent mental health services lead clinicians across health boards to share approaches that they were taking. They agreed to continue collective discussions on managing the shortage and on how to communicate effectively with patients.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

One of my constituents recently reached out, fearing that she will no longer be able to access ADHD medication for her son. As we have heard from a colleague, life can be extremely difficult for these patients, so it is critical that they receive regular updates so that they can plan ahead and navigate this difficult time. With that in mind, are there any other steps that the Scottish Government could take to help to keep families informed of progress towards resolving the shortage?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

To reiterate,

I absolutely appreciate that the medicine shortages are very concerning for patients who are affected and their families. As I said in response to Daniel Johnson, in November, the Scottish Government held an extraordinary meeting of CAMHS lead clinicians to discuss a collective approach to the shortage of ADHD medication. At that meeting, national health service boards shared the approaches that they were taking, and the group agreed to continue collective discussions.

The Scottish Government will continue close dialogue with all health boards to manage the shortage and provide support when needed.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I ask whether

the minister has a handle on two things. First, there are reports that assessments are ceasing to take place in some parts of the country. Is that happening? If so, how much is it happening and what is she doing about it? Secondly, some people have been put on alternative medicines but they have not been nearly as effective. Does the minister have a handle on that as well? Does she understand the full position?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I have not been informed of the issue in the first part of Willie Rennie’s question. We will chase that up with officials.

As I understand it, any decision to change medication will be a clinical one and will be taken on a one-to-one basis. I am happy to check on that question as well.

Human Rights Bill

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its plans for a human rights bill. (S6O-02737)

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

The Scottish Government will introduce a new human rights bill before the end of the parliamentary year. The bill’s consultation concluded in October, receiving almost 400 responses. I am grateful to the people who responded, and I look forward to continued engagement on the bill as it is drafted.

The bill will incorporate more internationally recognised human rights into Scots law, which is a task that has been given greater urgency by the United Nations special rapporteur on extreme poverty, who, last week, accused the United Kingdom Government of breaching its international obligations with regard to fundamental economic and social rights.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Equal rights for men and women is a fundamental principle of the UN. Men’s violence against women and girls is both a cause and manifestation of inequality. The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women—CEDAW—is unequivocal: states must address trafficking and prostitution if they are to eliminate discrimination against women. How will the Scottish Government’s incorporation of human rights charters into Scots law assist women who are subject to such violence and inequality?

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

The Scottish Government is committed to eliminating all forms of violence against women, which is why the bill will break ground for women in Scotland by incorporating CEDAW into Scots law, alongside three other UN treaties.

Incorporating four international treaties is a complex and technical endeavour, and we want to deliver a clear and accessible bill. To navigate the complexities, ministers are considering applying a procedural duty to certain rights in the bill, including those that relate to CEDAW. That would mean that, when delivering services such as housing or education, public authorities would have to consider the protections that the treaty gives women in areas such as health and family life, and they would be held accountable if they did not.

Community Audiology Services

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to carry out its commitment to put community audiology services on a par with free community eye care services. (S6O-02738)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

The Scottish Government remains

fully committed to enhancing community audiology services. We continue to work closely with

national health service boards

, social care and the third sector to develop fully integrated and sustainable audiology services that are located closer to the local communities that are being served. Our approach will be informed by outcomes from the recently published national audiology review.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The “Independent Review of Audiology Services in Scotland”, which I assume is what the minister was referring to, noted:

“there are many areas ripe for improvement, and there is a huge appetite for change.”

It found

“multiple, systemic problems within audiology services in NHS Scotland.”

Will the minister set out a timeline for such improvement?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I, too, welcomed the publication of the independent review of audiology services, and we are now carefully considering its recommendations. We are clear that the review is an opportunity to refocus audiology services in Scotland, to learn from mistakes that have been made and to shape a better future for audiology as a whole.

We will provide an update to the Parliament in due course. In the meantime, in response to the concerns that have been highlighted by the independent review, the Scottish Government has provided additional funding to health boards to support further training in auditory brainstem response assessments for staff working in paediatric audiology services.

Motorway Signage (Winter Preparations)

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Transport Scotland about motorway gantry signage ahead of winter. (S6O-02739)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Traffic Scotland is a service that is provided by Transport Scotland to ensure that journeys on Scotland’s roads are as safe and smooth as possible by gathering real-time information on Scotland’s trunk road and motorway network. That information is shared with road users on a number of platforms, including overhead gantry signs, to reduce the disruption that is caused by trunk road closures, congestion, events, road works, adverse weather, accidents and other incidents.

When gantry signs are not being used for such higher priority messages, there are two sets of background safety messages that are displayed, which are changed to coincide with summer traffic and winter traffic. Those messages are reviewed annually by Traffic Scotland. During the recent storms, the motorway gantry signs were utilised to inform the public of severe weather warnings.

All of this was discussed at the Transport Scotland winter service launch, which I attended recently.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am asking this question because I have had representations from Mid Scotland and Fife constituents that there are frequent instances of gantry signs not displaying time-sensitive information. Just one example, which I have seen for myself on several occasions, is the three M90 gantry signs on the south side of the Queensferry crossing that, between 9.30 and 10 o’clock-ish, tell motorists that there are queues at Hermiston Gait and on the city bypass when that is not correct. It probably was correct an hour before. Can we do something about the displaying of time-sensitive information? It is important for the decisions that motorists make.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The member’s constituents make an important point. I am sure she will be aware that that is an operational matter for Transport Scotland and Traffic Scotland. I am happy to relay her concerns to them, but she can also write directly to them about that operational matter.

Climate Change Mitigation (Peatland)

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the role that peatland plays in climate change mitigation and adaptation. (S6O-02740)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The Scottish Government’s position is that peatlands play a critical role in mitigating and adapting to the climate and nature emergencies. Peatlands are essential to our journey to net zero and to increasing our resilience against a changing climate.

Around 75 per cent of our peatlands have been degraded by drainage, extraction, overgrazing, afforestation and development. We have invested £250 million in restoration and are dedicated to achieving our targets in that regard. We are working with partners and stakeholders to ensure that our peatlands continue to contribute to our climate goals, while supporting biodiversity and sustainable land management.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

My constituents in Galloway are again facing a tidal wave of applications for new wind farms in an area that already has a disproportionately high number of existing wind turbines, with many more approved and awaiting construction.

Building on potential sites north of Newton Stewart will inevitably result in disturbance to peatland, which will, in turn, have a significant impact on water levels in the River Cree and the Penkiln burn. Newton Stewart and Minnigaff suffered serious flooding in 2015. Many homes were lost and businesses are only now recovering.

Although renewable energy is important, peatland preservation and restoration are equally important, as the minister set out. Will the minister assure my communities that peatland, and its role in flood prevention, will be given priority over inappropriately sited wind farms?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Work is currently under way to assess the operation of and, if necessary, update or replace the carbon calculator. The Scottish Government will ensure that adequate tools and guidance are available to inform the assessment of carbon impacts arising from proposals to develop peatlands and other carbon-rich soils.

I am delighted that Finlay Carson recognises the importance of restoring and protecting peatland. He will be keenly aware that the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill proposes the licensing of muirburn on peatland and I hope that his interest is a signal that the Conservatives will support the Government’s bill, which will limit the destructive burning of peatland, for all the reasons that he identifies.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

NatureScot’s peatland action programme grants funding to landowners to carry out peatland restoration, often by hiring private contractors. That means there is less scrutiny of working conditions, value for money and environmental impacts. Why is the Scottish Government outsourcing peatland restoration, rather than investing in democratically accountable and unionised public sector jobs?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

If Mercedes Villalba has any concrete evidence of instances of concern regarding working practices in peatland restoration and wants to write to me about those, I would be happy to look at them.

A75 and A77 Improvements

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government when it will publish a delivery plan for improvements to the A75 and A77 trunk roads. (S6O-02741)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The delivery plan for the strategic transport projects review 2 is currently being prepared

and will contain details of future improvements on both the A75 and A77.

This Government is already delivering improvements to both roads. This year alone, we will deliver more than £3 million-worth of vital structural maintenance on the A75 and resurfacing works worth £1.4 million on the A77.

We have been in discussion with the United Kingdom Government on the A75 specifically for more than a year, since it said that it wanted to fund aspects of the A75 improvement work through UK-wide connectivity funding, but no funding has yet been delivered by the UK Government for improvements to the A75. Clarity about funding is key to determining the timelines and plans for those projects.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

I hear what the minister says about discussions with the UK Government about the A75, but the commitments regarding work on both trunk roads were made by the Scottish Government in its strategic transport review and the A77 does not feature at all in the UK Government’s connectivity review.

Does the minister accept that there is real frustration in the community, and from businesses such as the ferry companies operating from Cairnryan, about the fact that we do not have a clear timeline or a clear commitment to funding the promised improvements to those trunk roads? Will she agree to meet a cross-party delegation of members and representatives of local campaign groups, in order to hear why improving those vital road links is so crucial to the economy of the south-west of Scotland?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have already heard representations—from industry, in particular—on a number of occasions, and I think that Colin Smyth’s points about Cairnryan are well made. If diary commitments permit, I would certainly be interested to meet the campaigners.

However, I reiterate that the interested parties from whom I have heard so far have said that they really want action on the realignment at Springholm and Crocketford. That is the piece of work that we understand that the UK Government wants to help to fund. There are other areas that we have been supporting and funding, not least the fact that we have supported six maintenance programmes on the A77 in this financial year alone.

As I have said to many members who have asked such questions, it should be remembered that the Maybole bypass, which has made a big difference to people who use the A77, was delivered by this Government.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

The A77 is a key road for businesses and the thousands of local people who rely on it to commute to work and to visit family and friends. The number of accidents on the road is very concerning. Public safety is at risk, and we need to see action. Will the Scottish National Party Government invest to improve that vital route, or does it plan to cut the budget for roads again next year?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I refer the member to my comments about the Maybole bypass. There has also been the Symington and Bogend Toll work, the Park End to Bennane project, the Glen App wide single carriageway and the Haggstone climbing lane. In addition, this year, £1.4 million has been invested at the Kirkoswald south gateway, south of Turnberry, north of Turnberry, Turnberry and Treeswoodhead Road. That investment continues. We are committed to supporting people who use the A77 and the A75.

UK Government Migration Policy (Impact on Scotland’s Economy and Workforce)

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact of United Kingdom Government migration policy on Scotland’s economy and workforce. (S6O-02742)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The UK Government’s immigration system does not meet Scotland’s distinctive needs, as Scotland’s population story differs from that of other parts of the UK. All sectors of the Scottish economy are experiencing labour shortages as a direct consequence of Brexit and the ending of free movement across Europe.

The national strategy for economic transformation’s skilled workforce programme sets out the actions that we are taking to work with employers to address labour and skills gaps. Our recently published paper “Migration to Scotland after independence” sets out proposals to introduce a welcoming immigration system that will increase our working-age population and address our skills shortages.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

The cabinet secretary may know that, at a recent meeting of the Parliament’s Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, Professor Pacquin of the national school of public administration in Quebec confirmed that arrangements in Canada allow the National Assembly of Quebec to make decisions about economic immigration that meet Quebec’s specific needs, and that that has produced substantial economic benefits for Quebec and for Canada.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that if the Scottish Parliament had similar powers, that would allow us to address the issues that we face under current UK Government policy, such as the declining population and skills shortages that the cabinet secretary mentioned, and that, in the absence of reform of the immigration system, only independence offers us the opportunity to fully implement our own distinct system tailored to the needs of the people of Scotland?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Absolutely—yes. Keith Brown makes a very salient point. This Government has consistently argued for the devolution of migration powers to the Scottish Parliament. The UK Government has blatantly ignored that. Its immigration system is not designed to meet our needs and it is having a damaging effect on Scotland’s economy and communities.

Scotland has distinctive needs. Our population story differs from that of the rest of the UK. I agree that it is only through independence and having full powers on migration that Scotland can have the opportunity to devise a humane, principled approach to migration that is needs based and that delivers positive outcomes for our communities, public services and the economy, rather than one that tries to send people to Rwanda, contrary to the view of the courts.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

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

Michael Matheson (Expenses)

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. Michael Matheson ran up an £11,000 bill on his iPad and claimed the costs from the taxpayer. It was over the Christmas break, and £7,300 of that bill covered a single day, which was a public holiday. To put that into context, to run up those charges, the health secretary would have needed to have sent 8,000 emails in that one day—that is, an email written and sent every 10 seconds continuously for 24 hours—all while he was in Morocco on holiday. Does the First Minister really believe that Michael Matheson ran up all those costs on parliamentary business—yes or no?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

There is clearly more to say on this issue, which is why Michael Matheson has agreed to make, with the agreement of the Parliament, a personal statement later today. I have no intention of pre-empting that statement. He will lay out in full detail what has happened in relation to use of his iPad.

Michael has, of course, agreed to pay back the full amount. He has admitted to making an honest mistake and, of course, he will elaborate on that and certainly reflect on it. [

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

I understand that, in our politics, the very first place that we all go to is to think the very worst of each other. I hold my hands up—I have often been guilty of that, too. However, honest mistakes do happen. Michael has been a member of this Parliament since its inception. All of us who have worked with him know that he is a man of honesty and, indeed, of integrity. Instead of rushing to besmirch each other’s characters, perhaps our politics would be a little better if we gave each other the benefit of the doubt.

Michael will lay out in full what has happened in relation to his iPad. The central point is that he has already agreed to pay back—I think that he has, in fact, already done this—the full amount that was incurred on this expense.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Humza Yousaf said that it was an honest mistake. He is 50 per cent right with that. He also said that he has no intention of getting into this. Well, I have no intention of letting the First Minister off with that argument, because this goes to the heart of his Government and his actions, and to the impact that this is having on people across Scotland. This morning it emerged that Michael Matheson had cancelled a Government visit to a Glasgow general practice surgery. The health secretary has stopped doing his job because of this. That really matters when Scotland’s national health service is in crisis and we are approaching winter.

It matters if there has been an attempt to dupe taxpayers into paying £11,000. For nearly a year, Michael Matheson was happy for the taxpayer to pick up the bill. He made no attempt to repay it until he was caught. His story is farcical beyond belief.

I will repeat my question to the First Minister. Can he guarantee that Michael Matheson ran up all these costs on parliamentary business—yes or no?

The First Minister

Again,

Michael Matheson will lay out in full detail what has happened. He has already said, of course—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

When a question has been put to the First Minister, I am sure that we all want to

hear the response. We cannot hear the response when people are shouting from their seats.

The First Minister

The response is that there is clearly more to it. Douglas Ross is absolutely right on that. What I will not do is pre-empt the personal statement that Michael Matheson has, with the Presiding Officer, agreed to make later this afternoon. He will lay out in full detail what has happened. However, importantly, when Michael Matheson was made aware of that mistake, he took corrective action, and that corrective action was, of course, to repay the full amount.

I disagree entirely with Douglas Ross on the idea that Michael Matheson has been doing anything other than concentrating on the job at hand. That is why, this morning, he was able to announce—we were able to announce—that we have secured the future of community link workers posts in Glasgow, with additional investment of £1.2 million. On top of that, he is the health secretary who ensured that Scotland was the country where there were no junior doctors strikes, and who secured annual funding of £100 million to help to reduce waiting lists.

Michael Matheson is absolutely concentrating on the job at hand, but he will lay out, later this afternoon, the full detail of what has happened in relation to his parliamentary iPad.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The health secretary is not doing his job. We know that he refused to comment on shocking accident and emergency waiting times this week because he was worried about questions about his personal conduct. Yes, we need to hear from the health secretary, but this now goes beyond his actions. The First Minister has put his personal reputation on the line.

When the story broke, Humza Yousaf said that the £11,000 bill was a “legitimate expense”. He said that the money did not need to be repaid to the taxpayer. He called Michael Matheson a

“person of integrity and character”.

He said:

“I ... absolutely take Michael at his word.”

He gave him his 100 per cent backing. The First Minister claims that Michael Matheson’s word is more important than the facts, but Humza Yousaf’s integrity is at stake here.

I put a direct question to the First Minister, and he cannot just refer to the statement this afternoon. Does the First Minister still believe, as he did last week—even now, with all the evidence—that the £11,000 bill was a legitimate expense?

The First Minister

First of all, to get a lecture on principles and integrity from the party that gave us Boris Johnson is quite something. In a week when Douglas Ross’s party’s flagship policy on Rwanda was torn to pieces by the Supreme Court—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

First Minister.

The First Minister

—it is hardly a party to be lecturing anybody on principles—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

First Minister.

It is absolutely impossible to hear any question or response at the moment, because there is far too much noise coming from members. I ask them to desist.

The First Minister

As I said, it is clear that more has been discovered in relation to the iPad and the expense. Michael Matheson will make that clear in a statement later this afternoon.

I have absolute confidence in Michael Matheson as the cabinet secretary for health, and I will tell members why. On top of ensuring that we resolved the issue around community link workers posts in Glasgow and that we resolved the junior doctors strikes—[

Interruption

.]

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Deflection! Deflection!

The Presiding Officer

I ask you, Mr Hoy, to ensure that that is the last remark that I hear from you when you are not on your feet and have not been called to speak.

The First Minister

Conservative members do not want to hear it, because it is contrary to their claims.

Michael Matheson is the health secretary who announced £15.6 million of additional funding for the hospital at home scheme this year to deal with winter pressures. He is the health secretary who announced £50 million of funding for the Scottish Ambulance Service, and who is entirely focused on ensuring that the national health service recovers through what will be one of the most difficult winters.

As I said, Michael Matheson, upon discovering what was an honest mistake, paid back the expense in its entirety.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It was not “upon discovering” something. He claimed it—he claimed £11,000 from the taxpayer.

All that I have asked Humza Yousaf is this. Does he still agree, as he did last week, that that is a legitimate expense—yes or no? Does he agree that those costs of £11,000 were run up purely on parliamentary business—yes or no? I have asked that three times, and three times I have not had an answer.

The fact is that the First Minister should have immediately launched an investigation into the matter. He should have demanded that Michael Matheson hand over the device to be examined. Instead, he is the last person in Scotland who still believes his health secretary’s ridiculous claim.

If the story changes to be about family or personal usage, that still will not cut it, because it will be nearly a year after the claim, and a week into the scandal. The evidence shows that Michael Matheson claimed £11,000 of taxpayers’ money when he knew that it was not for parliamentary work. It was not just a mistake—it was dishonest.

Will Humza Yousaf do the right thing and sack Michael Matheson, or will he wait for his resignation?

The First Minister

As I have already demonstrated in my responses to Douglas Ross, Michael Matheson has been concentrating on ensuring

that our NHS recovers through what will be one of the most challenging winters that it has faced. That is evidenced by the fact that, over the past few weeks, he has been working diligently to ensure that we are able to fund community link workers posts in Glasgow. I am pleased that we have been able to get a resolution on that matter.

This is, of course, a matter between Michael Matheson, as an MSP, and the parliamentary authorities.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

He is your minister. You are backing him.

The First Minister

The Parliament has, of course, made it clear that it has investigated the matter—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

No, they have not.

The First Minister

—but

I have, in fact, answered Douglas Ross’s questions.

The Presiding Officer

Mr Ross!

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

They have not investigated him.

The Presiding Officer

Excuse me, First Minister.

The First Minister is answering questions.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

He is not!

The Presiding Officer

Mr Ross!

You have had an opportunity to put questions to the First Minister. It is extremely important that we carry out our business in an orderly fashion and show one another courtesy and respect.

The First Minister

I have answered Douglas Ross’s question. My answer was that, clearly, more has come to light, as Michael Matheson will make clear in just a couple of hours’ time. That is why he took the decision to repay the full amount of the expense. Michael Matheson will lay that out later this afternoon.

He will then continue to do what he has been doing for weeks and months, which is ensuring that our NHS gets all the support that it needs during one of the most difficult periods in its history.

Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board (Corporate Homicide Investigation)

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. While the health secretary fights to save his job, the crisis in the national health service continues. Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board has been named as a suspect in a corporate homicide investigation into the deaths of four patients, including 10-year-old Milly Main.

For years, Milly’s family have sought justice but, years on from the case first being raised, no one has been held to account and no one has lost their job. The chair, John Brown, who has overseen the scandal, comes to the end of his term in a few weeks. However, despite being chair of the only public body in Scottish history to be named a suspect in a corporate homicide case, he is to be kept on by the Government as an adviser on NHS good governance. An adviser on NHS good governance—you could not make this up.

What message does that send to grieving families, and what does it say about the First Minister’s judgment, that the man who presided over this scandal will continue to advise his Government?

The First Minister

First of all, my

thoughts and condolences continue to go to the families who have been impacted and affected. Let me pay credit to Anas Sarwar, who I know has provided support to many of those families who have been so tragically impacted and affected.

Where Anas Sarwar and I vehemently disagree is that I, of course, believe that the Government has taken action. That is why we established the public inquiry in the first place. The entire purpose and point of a public inquiry is to get to the truth of these matters. I obviously cannot comment on a live police investigation. It is important for me to say that individuals have not been named in relation to the health board. In that regard, it is the health board of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde that has, as a corporate entity, been named as a suspect.

I say to Anas Sarwar that, although he may wish to be the judge and the jury in the investigation, it is my job to ensure that I do not interfere or intervene in either the public inquiry or, indeed, a live police investigation. We will hold the board to account when necessary. That is why the oversight board was established in the first place and why we ensured that the 108 recommendations were completed. We will allow the independent inquiry and the independent police investigation to get on with the job that they are meant to do without the Government interfering.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister’s judgment is called into question, because Jeane Freeman put those people into special measures and Humza Yousaf lifted them out of special measures and empowered them.

Let me be clear: John Brown should not be advising the Government and he should not hold any public appointments while the criminal investigation and the public inquiry continue. The chief executive of the health board, Jane Grant, has been in post since before Milly died. During that time, she has been paid more than £1 million. She has led an organisation that is now being investigated for corporate homicide, that has gaslit grieving families, shut down and bullied NHS staff, and called into question the results of an independent review that exposed fatal infections in children. She will continue to run the health board while the police investigate her actions and those of the people who report to her. In any other walk of life, suspects would not be allowed to walk free on a crime scene.

Why does the First Minister continue to back, and not sack, the chief executive of the health board?

The First Minister

To be absolutely clear, unless Anas Sarwar has other information that is not in the public domain, individuals such as Jane Grant have not been named as suspects. It is of course NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, as a corporate entity, that has been named as a suspect. It is a suspect, and it is important that the police investigation is allowed to continue. As I said, Anas Sarwar may wish to be the judge and the jury. It is important that I allow the police investigation to happen without interruption.

Anas Sarwar has made the point that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde was de-escalated. He is right—it was de-escalated—but the entire point is that it was de-escalated because it made improvements in performance following the completion of all 108 recommendations outlined in the independent review. Is Anas Sarwar seriously suggesting that, having completed all the recommendations from the oversight board, no appropriate action should have been taken?

On patient safety, which is at the very heart of the issues, I am pleased that Parliament was able to pass the Patient Safety Commissioner for Scotland Bill. On top of that, we have taken many actions in relation to patient safety. I will continue to ensure that we allow the public inquiry and police investigation to take their course unimpeded, without interference from the Scottish Government. At the same time, we will do everything that we can to ensure patient safety in our NHS.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

It

is such a tragedy that, every week, the First Minister continues to demonstrate how completely out of depth he is in his position.

We have the first ever corporate homicide investigation of a public body in Scottish history, and those are the answers that we are getting from Scotland’s First Minister. Deadly mistakes were made, facts were denied, a cover-up is continuing and, to this day, no one—not a single person—has been held to account. Instead, incompetence is rewarded. This is not just the story of that health board; it is the story of the Scottish National Party Government. From deleted WhatsApp Covid messages to the leadership of the health board being allowed to continue in their jobs, it has all been so that the Government can try to save face, while families grieve the loss of loved ones.

First Minister, your choices have consequences. On Monday, Kimberly Darroch, the mother of Milly Main, said:

“I’ve never been able to celebrate Milly’s life like I should be. Anytime I think of Milly, I think of all the pain that day caused and continues to cause. ... I feel that pain the day I lost her every single day because of all of this.”

First Minister, for once, do the right thing: sack the leadership of that health board.

The First Minister

I

cannot imagine the pain of losing a child. It is every parent’s worst nightmare, without a shadow of a doubt. I have, of course, paid credit to those who have supported Kimberly Darroch, and other families who have suffered such a loss.

What I am interested in is action. That is why the Government established the oversight board. It is why we established the public inquiry, introduced and passed the Patient Safety Commissioner for Scotland Bill and introduced the duty of candour. It is why we established the independent national whistleblowing officer—the first of its kind in the United Kingdom. It is why we ensured that there are whistleblowing champions in every single health board. We will continue to demonstrate that leadership.

I always know that Anas Sarwar is faltering when he goes for the personal attacks. It is something that he has done throughout his time as leader of the Scottish Labour Party. I remind him about his version of leadership. Just yesterday, we saw a demonstration of the lack of leadership that Anas Sarwar is able to show. If, in the face of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Gaza being killed, Anas Sarwar cannot even demand that his own Labour members of Parliament back a ceasefire, that is not a version of leadership that I will subscribe to.

Cabinet (Meetings)

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

3. To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. (S6F-02537)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Tuesday.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I have a response to a freedom of information request that shows that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service contacted the Scottish Government four years ago about having to prop up station ceilings because of dangerous concrete. RAAC—reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete—is in 14 of those ceilings, from Milngavie to Portree. The chief fire officer asked for £70 million to fix the ceilings, but ministers actually cut the fire service’s capital budget in real terms.

Fire station roofs were the canary in the coal mine for the concrete crisis that is now affecting schools and hospitals, and yet the Government was nowhere on that. It did not tell Parliament about it, it ignored the issue internally and it even cut budgets. Firefighters run towards danger on every job. They should not have to face it when they return to base. Would the Government have ignored dangerous concrete for four years if it had been found in the ceiling of Bute house?

The First Minister

What we and many of our public bodies and local authorities have been doing is following the guidance of the Institution of Structural Engineers. It is important that we continue to align ourselves with that important guidance, and my understanding is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases where RAAC has been found, appropriate mitigations have been put in place.

Yesterday, I had a meeting with the Scottish Trades Union Congress, at which the Fire Brigades Union made a passionate plea in relation to the budgetary position of the service, in terms of capital and resource, and RAAC was mentioned in those discussions. I will, of course, give those calls absolute consideration, as will the Deputy First Minister, when we work up the budget next month.

What I will say to Alex Cole-Hamilton is that the Government has taken extensive measures and action, alongside our partners in local government and other public bodies, in relation to the RAAC issue. I am happy for the Government to provide Alex Cole-Hamilton with a written response, with all the detail of the actions that we have taken.

Glasgow Low-Emission Zone

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

4. To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the impact of the low-emission zone in Glasgow. (S6F-02550)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The Scottish Government remains committed to tackling air pollution through the introduction of low-emission zones in Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow. We already know that many drivers have taken action to prepare for LEZs following our awareness-raising campaigns. In addition, we have provided substantial funding to reduce emissions from midlife buses and taxis and supported those who are most in need of assistance to switch to sustainable and less polluting means of travel. More than £10 million has been provided through the LEZ support fund since 2019, resulting in almost 3,000 non-compliant vehicles being disposed of or retrofitted with cleaner technology.

It is too early to comment on the impact on air pollution since LEZ enforcement commenced on 1 June 2023. That is because the data needs to be collected over an appropriate period and analysed. However, we look forward to receiving the statutory LEZ reports on air quality data from Glasgow City Council in due course.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

It is encouraging that the most recent figures show a drop in the number of fines that are being issued in Glasgow’s low-emission zone, which indicates that public awareness is growing. What interactions are taking place between the Scottish Government and other councils in Scotland that are looking to implement similar LEZ schemes as we work together to move towards a cleaner, greener and healthier transport system?

The First Minister

I was pleased to see the number of penalty charge notices being issued falling month on month since July. I believe that that shows the intended deterrent effect of increasing surcharges for subsequent contraventions of the LEZs.

I am pleased that progress is being made on the other cities’ low-emission zones. We know that, when it comes to the challenges of air pollution right across Scotland, these measures are increasingly important. Enforcement of the LEZs will commence on 30 May 2024 in Dundee and on 1 June 2024 in Aberdeen and Edinburgh. It is important that, in the face of a climate crisis that we can all see in front of us almost every day, we do everything that we can to mitigate it. Further, and importantly, low-emission zones are an important public health measure, particularly in some of our most polluted urban areas.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I can tell the First Minister that at least 150 motorists are being wrongly issued fines every month for driving through Glasgow’s low-emission zone, and that Glasgow City Council says that it does not know what to do with the colossal sums—£0.5 million so far—that it is raising. Should it not have sorted that out before introducing this botched scheme?

The First Minister

It is hardly a surprise that every time the Government or, indeed, local government brings forward any even small or mild measure to tackle the climate crisis, it is opposed by the Conservatives time and again.

Let us be absolutely clear that all revenue above that incurred in running the LEZ scheme can be used only for activities that help to reduce air pollution or contribute towards achieving our climate change targets. I know that Glasgow City Council will be thinking about where it can spend that money to help to reduce air pollution or to meet its climate change targets.

I say to Graham Simpson and the other Conservatives that they cannot continue to be climate deniers; they have to get with the main stream and support anybody—whether that be national Government or local government—who is tackling the dangers of the climate crisis.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

The city of Glasgow, as the most locked-down city in the United Kingdom, desperately needs people to return to the night-time economy. Taxis are key to ensuring that people have confidence that they will be able to get home, but taxi drivers have had to fight for every concession to help them to comply with the LEZ. Taxi drivers tell me that there is only one garage that will help them to comply and the waiting list goes as far as 2026, but they have only a year to comply. Given that, as the First Minister said, other cities will face the same challenges, will he look into having a national grant scheme? What else can be done to help the taxi trade to comply? Given that Scotland’s largest city needs to come out of the pandemic and recover, it is very important to deal with this.

The First Minister

This is, of course, an important issue. We all value the night-time economy and the important role that taxi drivers play in it.

It is important to note that it is not necessary to purchase a new taxi or an electric taxi to be LEZ compliant. For taxi operators who wish to change their vehicle, some older taxis might be suitable for retrofitting. However, I take Pauline McNeill’s point. If, as she said, there is only one garage that can help and it has extremely long waiting lists, I will ensure that we liaise with Glasgow City Council to see what support we can provide.

It should be said that the LEZ support fund has provided grant funding for taxi retrofits since 2019. Since it opened, more than 300 taxis have taken up funding for retrofitting. A fund is therefore available, but I take the points that

Pauline McNeill has raised very seriously, and we will explore and examine with our partners in Glasgow City Council whether there is more that we can do.

ScotRail Services (Alcohol Ban)

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on when the Scottish Government will review its ban on alcohol consumption on ScotRail train services. (S6F-02532)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

First, I should acknowledge that there is quite a wide range of views on that issue. My priority is ensuring that ScotRail services are safe and enjoyable for all users and staff, and specifically for women and girls. We know about the role that alcohol often plays in making women feel unsafe. That is why the Minister for Transport has asked officials at Transport Scotland to engage with the British Transport Police, ScotRail, Scottish Rail Holdings and Transport Focus, among other organisations, to ensure that all views on continuing the alcohol ban on ScotRail trains are given due consideration and all impacts are assessed.

Following a meeting last month, we have written to trade union leaders to ask for their views on the issue. We will, of course, update Parliament in the most appropriate way when a decision has been made and we have taken into account all the views of stakeholders.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

It is now three years since alcohol was banned on ScotRail trains as a Covid precaution measure. ScotRail and the British Transport Police have told me that the ban is unworkable. People who indulge in antisocial behaviour are ignoring the ban and drinking anyway. It is the law-abiding Scots who are being penalised. Therefore, is it not time that the Scottish National Party showed some trust in the Scottish public, scrapped this draconian rule and got more people back on the trains, especially during the upcoming Christmas period?

The First Minister

I will say a couple of things in response to Douglas Lumsden’s question. I appreciate that there is a wide variety of views on the issue. That is exactly why the Minister for Transport has asked for a variety of stakeholders to be engaged. I have already mentioned some of the stakeholders; they include the British Transport Police, Transport Scotland, ScotRail, trade unions and others.

We will give appropriate weight to those stakeholders and—as I am sure Douglas Lumsden will not dispute—we will give particular weight to the voices of women and girls, who are often those who tell us that they can feel unsafe when it comes to antisocial behaviour.

I do not have a fixed view regarding the evidence that will be presented, but if the evidence points towards the ban being lifted, we will explore that and give it appropriate consideration.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

While the ban is in place—and noting that there is antisocial behaviour other than

drinking alcohol—can the First Minister say anything about the enforcement of it? I understand that some staff are getting body-worn cameras. Is there any evidence of the effectiveness of those cameras?

The First Minister

The use of body-worn cameras is an operational matter for ScotRail, but it is important to clarify that staff are not expected to enforce the alcohol ban on ScotRail trains; the enforcement of the alcohol ban is a matter for the British Transport Police. The expansion of body-worn camera provision for staff through the roll-out of 900 new cameras across ScotRail is part of a £1.6 million investment in tackling antisocial behaviour on the rail network. That is not specifically targeted at the consumption of alcohol on ScotRail services; it is part of a wider effort across the railways to make staff safer while carrying out their duties and to improve the experiences of the travelling public.

Research indicates that body-worn cameras can positively influence customer behaviour and can reduce a wide range of antisocial behaviours. I am sure that ScotRail will continue to update Transport Scotland and the Minister for Transport on the matter.

Social Care (Pay)

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

6. To ask the First Minister what immediate action the Scottish Government is taking to address the reported crisis in social care, in light of the letter from the Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland stating that the social care pay uplift is insufficient. (S6F-02538)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I place huge value on those in

our social care workforce and the exceptional care that they provide. I am fully committed to improving their pay. To reflect that, the £12 minimum pay rate from April 2024 represents an increase of more than 10 per cent from the £10.90 minimum rate that was introduced in April this year, and those workers have had a 14.3 per cent increase over the past two years. For workers in children’s services, who previously received the national minimum wage, the increase will represent a minimum increase in pay of 15.2 per cent compared with April 2023 levels. We are doing all that we can within the devolved responsibilities and budgets to address the cost of living pressures. However, as a result of 13 years of Tory austerity, there has never been greater pressure on our public finances. If only we had full powers over our budget, we would not have to be at the whim of an austerity-driven United Kingdom Government.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I am pleased to hear

how much the First Minister values social care. He will know that vacancies for social care staff are up and that turnover is up. Some providers are handing back contracts, because they are unable to deliver quality care due to a lack of staff. The First Minister announced that social care pay would rise to £12 from April 2024, but that is now the uprated rate for the real living wage, so any advantage has been eroded. Does the First Minister believe that social care staff deserve the bare minimum in pay? If not, will he include revised proposals in the budget to properly value our hard-working social care staff?

The First Minister

We do value our

hard-working social care staff, and that is why we have agreed to increase their pay by more than 10 per cent from the £10.90 minimum rate that was introduced in April this year. I fully accept, having engaged with the social care workforce, that they want us to go further and to go faster. I completely respect and understand that. We are, of course, constrained by our budget.

I remind Jackie Baillie that it was her colleague Anas Sarwar who said that he had a presumption against income tax rises. Jackie Baillie seems to be asking us to increase significantly the pay of social care workers to £15 an hour. That would cost the Government an additional £1.2 billion. On the one hand, Jackie Baillie and the Scottish Labour Party are saying that we cannot raise revenue in any way, shape or form but, at the same time, we have to find £1.2 billion to increase the pay rate to £15 an hour.

We will engage with the Scottish Labour Party. We are in the run-up to the budget. However, if Jackie Baillie is asking us to spend in the order of £1.2 billion, she has to tell us, if she has any credibility whatever, where we will find that money from.

The Presiding Officer

We move to constituency and general supplementaries.

Ferry Services (Isle of Arran)

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Last Friday, technical faults meant that both ferry services to Arran—between Ardrossan and Brodick, and between Lochranza and Claonaig—were off, with cancellation continuing into Saturday. Given the continuing impacts of ferry disruption, what economic assistance will the Scottish Government consider to enable businesses on Arran to survive what is already proving to be a very challenging winter?

The First Minister

I thank Kenneth Gibson not only for his question, but for his invitation to me to speak to business and community representatives on Arran earlier this year. Having had those conversations, I absolutely recognise the severe impact that that disruption has, regrettably, had. The best thing is for Caledonian MacBrayne to ensure that such disruption does not happen. That is why the Government is absolutely committed to investing in our ferry services and delivering six new major vessels to Scotland’s ferry network by 2026.

The chartering of the MV Alfred is a further example of that commitment. CalMac was able to redeploy the vessel last weekend to pick up services on the Ardrossan to Brodick route.

That being said, on my visit to Arran I heard very clearly from people in the community there that they want better engagement with CalMac. I will ensure that the Minister for Transport provides Kenneth Gibson with updates on how that conversation has been going.

Child Disability Payment (Processing Times)

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

Today it has been reported that processing times for child disability payment applications have risen to more than 100 days. That represents just the latest failure of Social Security Scotland to deliver for people who are in need. Does the First Minister believe that those shocking delays embody “dignity, fairness and respect”?

The First Minister

I understand that Jeremy Balfour has been invited to visit the agency if he wishes. I do not know whether he has taken it up, but the invitation to him to do so remains. The agency will be able to talk him through the numerous actions that it is taking to reduce processing times.

I do not disagree with Jeremy Balfour that the processing times are far longer than we want them to be. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and I have spoken at great length and in great detail about a number of actions that the agency is taking. I will ensure that she responds to Jeremy Balfour with full details of those.

The positive aspect of the most recent statistics is that, for many of our benefits, the redetermination rate here in Scotland is much lower than that of the United Kingdom.

I accept that the agency might be taking slightly longer to process applications at the moment, but it is really important that we get the right decision the first time round in as many cases as possible. I will ensure that Jeremy Balfour receives a full update from the cabinet secretary on the actions that we are taking.

Closure of BT Call Centre (Alness)

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

As the First Minister will know, yesterday the BT Group confirmed the closure of its Alness base. Some 100 jobs will be lost, which will impact one in 50 local residents in the town. What talks has the BT Group had on preventing those job losses, given that it has benefited from and enjoyed hundreds of millions of pounds of Government funding?

The First Minister

I will ensure that the relevant cabinet secretary engages directly with Rhoda Grant on any support that we are able to provide. These are extremely difficult times for the group of staff involved. We do not want job losses and will do everything that we can to prevent them. If it looks as if they are necessary and will occur, we can engage the partnership action for continuing employment initiative—PACE—and insist on redeployment where possible. However, we want to see whether we can avoid the 100 job losses that Rhoda Grant mentioned. I will ensure that, following First Minister’s question time, the cabinet secretary will engage with Rhoda Grant directly.

Public Sector Contracts (Illegal Settlements)

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

By making calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, the First Minister has shown the moral leadership that is completely lacking at Westminster. Although the focus is, rightly, on trying to stop the slaughter that is happening there, it is clear that more than 180 Palestinians have been killed by extremist Israeli settlers and soldiers in the West Bank, and 1,000 have been forced to flee their villages. The United Nations has identified 97 companies that are complicit in Israel’s illegal occupation through its West Bank settlements.

The Scottish Government, rightly, takes a very strong stance against support for any company that is still trading with Russia after its invasion of Ukraine. Will the First Minister confirm that any company that is complicit in illegal occupation—whether it be of Palestine or of Ukraine—will be banned from receiving public sector contracts or grants here in Scotland?

The First Minister

It is worth reiterating that it is also the position of the UK Government that such settlements are illegal, and that most of the international community agrees with that.

When Ivan McKee was the Minister for Business, Trade, Tourism and Enterprise, he wrote to a small number of companies that were on a United Nations list and had links to the Government or public bodies to ask what steps they were taking in relation to working in illegal settlements.

My understanding is that we are somewhat constrained in what we can do under the devolved settlement, but I make it very clear to Ross Greer that we will examine what we are able to do. Anybody who is profiteering from illegal settlements anywhere—wherever they are, including in the occupied territories—should not be able to profit from public contracts here.

Let us explore what is possible within the limitations of devolution. I join Ross Greer and many others across the chamber in urging the international community to get right behind a ceasefire—of course, a ceasefire now.

Migration

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

Our approach to migration and refugees should have dignity, fairness and respect at its core, as opposed to the United Kingdom Government’s hostile environment approach, which we currently have to endure.

Yesterday, the UK Government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda was ruled to be illegal by the Supreme Court. Can the First Minister provide information on any assessment of those plans by the Scottish Government? Will he confirm that more than £140 million of taxpayers’ money, including Scottish taxpayers’ money, has been squandered on that illegal scheme? Has he heard a single word of criticism from any Tory MSP of the huge waste of taxpayers’ money on that unworkable, scandalous and illegal scheme?

The Presiding Officer

I call the First Minister to respond on matters for which the Scottish Government is responsible.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I am afraid that all that I heard was a whole bunch of groans from Tory MSPs when Keith Brown mentioned the need for a humane asylum system here in the UK, which is exactly what we need. We need a humane system that does not leave asylum seekers stuck for years in destitution without the right to work.

We recently launched our paper on migration in an independent Scotland; it sets out our approach to migration, which is based very much on the values of dignity, fairness and respect. Migrants who come to this country contribute more than they take; they bring skills and experience that greatly benefit our economy and they enhance our society’s diversity.

The UK Government’s policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda is morally repugnant and has now been confirmed as unlawful, too. That policy should be consigned to the dustbin of history and should have no place in a modern and humane society.

Ayr Station Hotel Fire

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

It is almost eight weeks since I raised in the chamber the issue of the fire at Ayr station hotel. Ayr station is still closed, the surrounding roads are closed because of safety concerns and local businesses are suffering. I ask again what funding and help the Scottish Government will provide to help to find a speedy resolution.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I thank

Sharon Dowey for raising an important issue. All our hearts go out to the communities that have been affected by the disruption from the Ayr station hotel fire. I will ensure that a written update is provided to Sharon Dowey on the actions that we have taken alongside our partners in Ayrshire. I again commend our brave firefighters in the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, who diligently and efficiently dealt with the tragic fire at the hotel. I will ensure that Sharon Dowey gets full details of our interactions with the local authority and of the support that we can provide.

Education Reform

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

This morning, the Institute for Fiscal Studies published a report that shows that children in Scotland are falling behind in science and maths, and that the gap between the test scores of the richest children and those of the poorest children has grown. Yesterday, headteachers were the latest group to join a chorus of experts who say that the Government’s inaction on reform is hurting the poorest students. Does the First Minister accept that, with every day that passes while his Government dithers on the key decisions that are needed on reform, he is denying Scotland’s children the opportunities that they deserve?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

No—I do not agree with that characterisation at all. We are committed to substantially eliminating the poverty-related attainment gap, but that is being made far more difficult by a Westminster Government that is hell bent on deepening poverty at every stage.

We are making progress on reducing and narrowing the poverty-related attainment gap. The recent Audit Scotland report and exam results show that the gap between attainment levels in the least-deprived areas and those in the most-deprived areas has narrowed from the 2019 level—the pre-pandemic level. I can send Pam Duncan-Glancy full details about the narrowing of that gap and the progress that we are making.

We are absolutely committed to continuing to narrow the gap. That job would be made far easier if we did not have the headwind of austerity that the Westminster Government has inflicted on the people of Scotland.

Community Link Workers (Funding)

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Community link practitioners play a vital role in general practitioner surgeries, including in my constituency. It is, therefore, welcome that the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care has confirmed that the Scottish Government will provide additional funding over three years to help to preserve the existing community link worker programme within Glasgow city health and social care partnership. Can the First Minister provide further information about that funding and how it will be directed to continue to deliver positive health outcomes in communities?

The First Minister

I agree entirely with Ivan McKee’s sentiments. Community link workers are absolutely vital to the communities that they serve. Every member who has had the pleasure of interacting with community link workers knows how much they are valued—not just by the communities but by the general practices in which they serve. They are at the forefront of our efforts to address health inequalities.

Since we learned of the risk to those vital services, we and Michael Matheson have engaged extensively over several months with the Glasgow health and social care partnership to find a solution. I am pleased to confirm that we will provide that partnership with £1.2 million to sustain full provision of community link workers. As Ivan McKee rightly said, we have offered that funding on a recurrent basis for the next three years.

As I have said, community link workers are absolutely fundamental and vital to tackling the inequality that is too rife in our communities and has been exacerbated by the Westminster cost of living crisis. I hope that the decision to fund the workers for the next three years brings peace of mind not just to the staff whose posts were at risk but, most important, to the communities that they serve.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s question time.

Points of Order

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

This week, the Scottish Government finally accepted that its claim that Scotland had 25 per cent of Europe’s offshore wind potential was wholly wrong. The correct figure is 6 to 7 per cent. Angus Robertson is walking out of the chamber, but he might wish to wait for this moment. Angus Robertson was officially advised to stop using the misleading figure on 28 September 2022, but he continued to state it as truth until at least 18 October 2022, including in meetings with foreign Governments.

Members across the chamber have raised repeated concerns that that was a breach of the ministerial code. The former First Minister swept that under the carpet. What powers does the Presiding Officer have to compel the current First Minister to ask the independent adviser on the ministerial code to establish whether knowingly giving false statistics to foreign Governments is a breach of the ministerial code?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I thank Mr Kerr for his point of order on a matter that he has previously raised and which I have previously addressed.

As members are aware, the accuracy of members’ contributions is not a matter for the chair to rule on and is not covered by standing orders. However, as a matter of courtesy and respect, I expect all members always to be accurate in their contributions. The Scottish ministerial code also states that it is of paramount importance that ministers give accurate and truthful information to the Parliament and that inadvertent errors are corrected at the earliest opportunity.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

About two or three minutes ago, an email arrived to tell us that there will be a personal statement from Michael Matheson at 2 o’clock. We in the chamber—and the watching Scottish public—might want to know whether we will be able to ask questions of Michael Matheson once he has delivered his statement. If he is not going to be subjected to questions, I think that the people of Scotland will wonder exactly what is going on in this Parliament.

The Presiding Officer

I thank Mr Kerr for his point of order. Standing orders make it clear that personal statements are not debated.

Before we move to the next item of business, I will suspend business to enable the public gallery and the chamber to clear.

12:49 Meeting suspended.

12:51 On resuming—

Dying in the Margins Project

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-10827, in the name of Paul O’Kane, on dying in the margins. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I advise members that we are short of time today and a number of members are seeking to speak in the debate. I hope that I can rely on members to co-operate, given that we will be sitting again at 2 pm. We must allow the parliamentary staff sufficient time to do their job in clearing the chamber, so I ask all members to stick to their time, which is seven minutes for the member opening the debate, four minutes for each member in the open debate and seven minutes for the minister.

I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak button.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament welcomes the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie research project,

Dying in the Margins

, as well as The Cost of Dying photography exhibition taken from the project; understands that the project ran from 2019 to 2023, and was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and UK Research and Innovation (UKRI); further understands that the project shed light on what it sees as the profound effect that people’s socio-economic circumstances can have on their end of life experience; understands that, as part of the project, participants who were living with a terminal illness were photographed by Margaret Mitchell to create images conveying aspects of their end of life experience, and were given a camera to document their end of life experience themselves; considers that the project highlights the important challenges that are faced by people with a terminal illness who are living with poverty, and what it sees as structural disadvantage, including, but not limited to, unsuitable housing, energy costs and lack of income support; commends the bravery of the project’s participants, their families and carers, who documented their lives at, it considers, the most challenging time, to inform the public conversation around improving the end of life care for those living with poverty, including those in the West Scotland region, and what it sees as structural disadvantage; recognises the expertise of those who worked on the project, including University of Glasgow researchers, Dr Naomi Richards and Dr Sam Quinn, University of Auckland researcher, Professor Merryn Gott, and Marie Curie Head of Research and Innovation, Dr Emma Carduff; notes that the photography exhibition will be displayed in the Scottish Parliament on the week commencing 13 November 2023, and further notes the encouragement for MSPs to visit it and consider how they can tackle some of the issues that it raises.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

It is my pleasure to have secured today’s debate on the dying in the margins report, which was produced by the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie. I welcome to the Parliament family members and friends of some of the study participants who are with us in the gallery today. I am very pleased that they have all been able to join us to hear us discuss this important piece of work and the stories of their loved ones, which were shared so vividly in the exhibition and in the report.

That is a really important place to start. A dear friend said to me recently that dying is existential. It comes to us all, and the old adage is that there is nothing more certain in life. Despite all that, it touches the life of each person who is caring for a loved one with a terminal illness, and who is left behind, in different ways. We should reflect that we perhaps have only one mother, one father, one child, one brother, one sister or one dear friend, and their death will impact us in different ways. It can be exacerbated by different factors, with poverty clearly being a huge factor in the way that people experience the end of their life.

I thank all the members who signed my motion, and I look forward to hearing all the contributions in the debate. I put on record my thanks to members who have taken additional steps to highlight the work of the research and the exhibition. I thank Evelyn Tweed for sponsoring the exhibition, which is just outside the chamber. I hope that members have had a chance to see it and to discuss the report with colleagues from Marie Curie and the university.

The existence of poverty and destitution in Scotland brings shame on us all. The research conducted by the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie lays bare that poverty and destitution exacerbate the most distressing and difficult periods in the lives of an individual and their family. At a point when communities and the institutions of our society should be wrapping their arms around people to support them, they are too often let down. That we have allowed a system that means that people in their end of life are worried about whether they can heat their homes instead of spending their final months around family and friends is both unthinkable and unacceptable.

That is why I welcome what the research project has put together, because it really rips the cover off the issue. So often, population-level data can blur the real picture of what is happening in people’s lives. This project cannot be accused of that, because of the strong element of case study, because of the photographs and because it relates the experience of people’s lives. It is clear that it puts into high definition for all of us—quite literally—the linkage between poverty and terminal illness.

I thank the project team for that work and for the unique method of research. I also thank the University of Glasgow researchers Dr Naomi Richards and Dr Sam Quinn; the University of Auckland researcher Professor Merryn Gott; and Marie Curie head of research and innovation, Dr Emma Carduff. I additionally thank Margaret Mitchell, who photographed the participants and created the images that have formed the basis of the study. All their hard work, their expertise and, above all, their care and compassion in presenting the issue have allowed us to shine a bright light on this very important area.

It would be wrong not to recognise and thank also those who were at the heart of the research—the participants. I cannot begin to imagine what it must be like to be diagnosed with a terminal illness and to have that put upon you when you are already experiencing huge challenge and difficulty in your life. To follow that up by inviting people into that moment to document it, photograph it, study it and publish it is an incredibly brave decision and one that could not have been easy for many. I thank those who allowed their stories to be told. For those who are no longer with us, we hold them in dear memory today.

I was fortunate to visit Marie Curie’s Glasgow hospice over the summer. I got the opportunity to meet a number of the people who were being supported and cared for there. It helped me to reflect on what I had seen in the exhibition, and I met many people who were perhaps in similar circumstances. I met one man who reminded me a lot of Max, who was one of the participants in the study. Max’s story was typical of many and as informative as any other. He was an army veteran with experience of homelessness and trauma. He desperately wanted to remain at home, with the freedom that we all crave, but that was very difficult, as his home was a flat up four flights of stairs and lacking in other support provisions. Any time his cancer symptoms got too difficult to manage, he was admitted to the hospice. That was even more difficult for him, because he felt that he had been taken away from his dog, Lily, whom he dearly loved, and out of his own community, where he felt comfortable and secure.

Max’s story leads me nicely on to the asks and calls for action that the research makes. Max would have benefited greatly from the third ask in the report, which is to ensure that terminally ill people are offered timely and affordable adaptations to their property. We know from figures available from Public Health Scotland that, from 2021 to 2022, people who were dying spent around 90 per cent of the last six months of their life at home. Those settings are often inadequate, and whether those people can access adaptations can be a postcode lottery. People deserve the dignity of dying in their own home if that is what they choose, and it is incumbent on all of us to work to make that an option for them.

I am conscious of the time allotted, but there are other substantial and important recommendations in the report that I know colleagues will want to reflect on in their contributions, not least recommendations relating to the cost of energy and the cost of being able to heat a home and to have life-sustaining equipment, if that is required, and the money that is available to support people and their carers.

I hope that, when the minister closes, she will reflect on some of those asks directly and give us a sense of what the Government will do to push the agenda forward. I hope that she will meet me, Marie Curie and the researchers to discuss those issues in more detail.

As I said at the beginning, death and dying come to us all, but they do not impact us equally, because our society remains too unequal. In the most difficult moments of life—at the end of our lives—we must afford everyone decency, comfort and respect. I think that that is the very minimum that we would expect for ourselves and for everyone in our society. I hope that, through this debate and the research project, we can reflect on that going forward from here and make a real difference.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Dying is not something that most of us want to talk about, but we must. As policy makers, we have a responsibility to all our citizens from cradle to grave. The cradle bit is easy to talk about—doing all that we can to make sure that every child who is born here arrives in safety, comfort and love. It is not everything, but the box of essentials to help parents to keep each new Scottish baby warm and safe—the baby box—is a good reflection of that wish for an equal start.

We are perhaps not as good at talking about the end of life—perhaps it does not have the same feel-good factor—but we cannot ignore inequity at the end of life. We must have our eyes open, which dying in the margins, the joint study and exhibition that has been undertaken by the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie, helps us to do very well. I am very grateful to them for their work, and I am in awe of the research participants. I welcome to the gallery everyone who is involved.

This first-of-its-kind study, examining barriers to and experiences of dying at home for people who are living in poverty, shares the direct experience of participants through Margaret Mitchell’s images and the participants’ words. It is hugely powerful. I am grateful to Evelyn Tweed for sponsoring the exhibition in the Parliament.

I also thank Paul O’Kane for securing cross-party support and bringing this important topic to the chamber, giving us all the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. His speech was very thoughtful and a good start to the debate. Members’ business debates can be quite small affairs, particularly after First Minister’s question time, but I want everyone, particularly those in the gallery, to know that a debate can be the start of something and not just an event in itself.

In opening the debate, Paul O’Kane spoke about Max. For me, it was Marie’s story that struck me, perhaps because she was the same age as I was when I had a serious illness, and I reflect on the quite different experience that I had. Marie specifically spoke about the cost of taxis to get to her treatment. I was fortunate to have a family member move in with me and take on the specific task of running me to hospital, which made treatment a lot easier. In my area, Ayrshire, we have an excellent charity called Irvine & Troon Cancer Care, which provides that service for people who need it. It reflects the—I do not like the term—postcode lottery and the different experiences that folk have. We should not have to rely on location-specific charities to ensure that patients can fully take part in their treatment. It would be interesting to hear the Government’s reflection on that.

I support all the asks that are set out in the Marie Curie briefing. As well as actions for the United Kingdom and Scottish Governments in regard to finance, there are probably policy things that can be done more promptly. Paul O’Kane spoke about aids and adaptations, and I consider that action could be taken on those now. A constituent came to me for assistance when she had been injured falling down the stairs. She had had the aid and adaptation done in her bathroom but not yet on the stairwell, which made recovery quite challenging. We can all imagine how bad that would be.

We have a short debate time, and I know that we want to hear from every member who wants to speak, so I will just say that I will commit to working with others on the topic. I will certainly go to my local authority and health and social care partnership to see whether there are policy changes that can happen promptly to make people’s lives a bit better.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I remind all members who seek to speak in the debate to check that they have pressed their request-to-speak button. If they would do so, that would be helpful.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I thank Paul O’Kane for securing the debate.

I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am a practising national health service general practitioner, and I directly treat people with terminal illness.

Only two things are certain in life: death and taxes. Although there is often no holding us back from talking about His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, most of us are not very good at discussing death. Have we told our kids our wishes? Do we know our parents’ wishes? Do we even use the words “death” and “dying” instead of euphemisms?

Death is part of life and we all want people to have a dignified death, with the space to get their affairs in order, say their goodbyes and die peacefully and free from pain. Sadly, not everyone in Scotland is at peace when they die. For those in our communities who are living with a terminal illness and are at their most vulnerable, the financial impact of their prognosis can drain a family’s savings, greatly increasing the risk for many of falling below the poverty line. For people with little or no means, or for those who have lost their job because they are sick, terminal illness is not an equaliser.

The risk of poverty is particularly pronounced for women, Scots from minority ethnic communities and parents with young children. Some even incur debts that will be passed on to their loved ones after they die. According to research with Scots in the last year of their lives, which was carried out by Marie Curie in 2019, 26 per cent died in poverty—that is 2,800 working-age Scots. The charity Crisis tells us that, in 2021, 250 people in Scotland died while homeless. Statistics such as those are important because they provide a sense of scale, but behind every percentage point there are people, families and friends.

“The Cost of Dying” exhibition on display here in Parliament shows lived experiences with poignant and often worrying case studies of those who are trying to make ends meet so they can live the remainder of their lives in dignity. I congratulate the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie on delivering the impactful dying in the margins project, which illustrates the profound effect that socioeconomic circumstances can have on end-of-life experience. In Parliament today, we welcome friends and family who participated in that project: Max’s friend Derek, Stacey’s husband Joost and Linda’s daughter Nicola among others.

The question for us here is how to respond in concrete terms to that study. This Parliament can act in areas of devolved policy, and Marie Curie provides a list of suggestions that are well worth consideration, which include financial support for childcare for all terminally ill Scots, so that families can make the most of the time that they have left together; improved financial support for carers, so that they can focus on looking after their loved ones and making the most of the time that they have left together, without worrying about their finances; and ensuring that terminally ill people are offered timely and affordable adaptations to their property so that they can live the rest of their lives at home, if they wish. Local authorities can review eligibility for council tax support and for discretionary housing support.

As parliamentarians, we must always strive to do better. Having choice, control and the comfort of a dignified death is crucial for the terminally ill, who have already been robbed of so much by their illness. We can do more to help our fellow Scots to make memories with their loved ones and to live as well as they can, for as long as they are able to.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I am grateful to Paul O’Kane for bringing this debate to the chamber and I pay tribute to Marie Curie, the University of Glasgow and everyone who took part in their dying in the margins project. The research, and the associated photography exhibition “The Cost of Dying”, movingly highlight the experience of living in poverty with a terminal illness.

There is a strong link between premature death and poverty, and I could say much about the consequences of United Kingdom Government austerity on public health and about the role of the economy in preventing excess mortality. However, for those with a terminal illness, we must focus on the here and now and ensure that they have the support that they need to get the best possible quality of life.

Organisations across the country, including Marie Curie, offer vital support to people with a terminal diagnosis and to their loved ones. One key issue is the need to tackle the double burden of income loss and the increased expenditure caused by a terminal illness. Marie Curie found that two thirds of people with a terminal illness rely on benefits, so it is vital that we ensure sufficient support for people who are in that situation, and for their carers. I would encourage people to contact their local money advice service or MSP to ensure that they are getting everything that they are entitled to, including through Social Security Scotland, which has a fast-track application process for people with a terminal illness, with the aim being to start payments within seven working days.

Research shows that most people would rather die at home. However, for many people with a terminal illness, that is not an easy choice. As the dying in the margins work notes, part of the issue—especially nowadays—is to do with the cost of energy. This week, the Scottish Government’s energy minister, Gillian Martin, wrote to the UK Government on the need for a new social tariff mechanism, to be funded from energy windfall taxes, which would support the people who need it most.

Too many people are struggling to meet sky-high energy bills. Those bills are pushing more people into fuel poverty, and the UK Government must do more. For someone with an illness or disability, there are additional challenges. As Marie Curie points out, people with a terminal illness often start to spend more time at home; they also feel colder because of their symptoms, which means that they have a greater need to heat their home. In fact, research shows that, on average, a person’s energy bill will almost double following a diagnosis of motor neurone disease.

Therefore, I hope that the UK Government will listen to the calls for a social tariff to help the people who most need help with energy bills, and that that will be announced soon.

I commend all the people who took part in the dying in the margins research. I was certainly moved by the exhibition that was held in Glasgow, which is on display in Parliament this week. Sadly, most of those people are no longer with us, but I hope that their actions will help us to ensure that we deliver the best possible support for people to prevent more of our citizens from dying in the margins.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank my party colleague Paul O’Kane

for bringing this very much overlooked issue to the chamber.

I am so glad that I had the opportunity to view the dying in the margins exhibition at the Mitchell library in Glasgow earlier this year. Like others, I found it incredibly moving. Although it is, in many ways, a heartbreaking experience, it is necessary for us to be confronted by those images of people dying in poverty. I hope that all MSPs and staff in Holyrood have had the opportunity to see the main exhibition, or even the smaller exhibition that has been mentioned, and have been able to read the report.

The stories that are highlighted by the exhibits are so often left untold, and the individuals concerned naturally felt that they were not being listened to when the last months of their life were upon them. Such an exhibition provides an outlet for people in that position and shines a light on the warmth as well as the sorrow of the daily lives of people who are living with terminal illness.

As with so many things that we experience across the course of our lives, the process of death is influenced by the poverty and inequality that are experienced by so many. They are the root of the injustice that permeates our society, and for many, that injustice can last from the cradle to the grave.

I simply cannot accept that, which is what drove me to speak in today’s debate. We must do more to stop so many having so little while the few have so much. The rich can often afford to stay at home and receive daily care directly in the place where they have lived and prospered, but for people who have suffered through a life of struggling to make ends meet, it is often the case that no such options exist, and their life ends as it proceeded, with a sense of powerlessness.

I find that to be the final injustice, and one that we should do everything to limit. Everyone deserves to have as pain-free and peaceful a death as possible, surrounded by the people who love them, in a place that comforts them and where the choice—rather than being dictated by what can be afforded—is theirs. I am thankful to Marie Curie for all the dedicated support that it provides to people, but the cost of dying often takes over. The exhibition’s use of the images enhances the words and what we have said in this debate.

I, too, was touched by some of the experiences of people in the exhibition, including Deep and Max. When I saw the image of Max and read the words, I thought, “Good on him that he did what he wanted to do.” We should be supporting that. If our economy did not simply forget about people such as Max, that would not be necessary. However, for many of those in power, it is much more convenient simply to pay no heed to the poverty that blights our society. They forget that it could happen to any of us, and we would then wish for compassion and fairness. Let me be clear: my belief is that we need not have an economy that works only for the rich. We could, rather, have one that ensures that everyone in society has the means to live and die in dignity.

I am conscious of time. I want to make sure that we all look to the conclusions of the report and, as other members have said, that we all work to make sure that we get these things in place.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

I, too, congratulate Paul O’Kane on securing this debate. The subject has affected many of us deeply. I am not often distracted during First Minister’s question time, but that certainly happened to me today when I was thinking about this debate.

After visiting “The Cost of Dying” photography exhibition, I felt compelled to speak in this debate. Colleagues have already raised serious issues around energy bills, social security support, timely access to affordable housing, and adaptations. I trust that the minister will address those when she speaks.

Seeing the dying in the margins project’s exhibition was a deeply moving experience. It provided a profound visual insight into the harsh realities that people who are living in poverty face at the end of their lives. I am sure that I am not the only one who fought back tears and felt quite overwhelmed by the struggles that the participants faced, and I was also humbled by the resilience that they showed. I thank Marie Curie, the University of Glasgow and especially Dr Emma Carduff, Dr Sam Quinn and Ellie, whom I spoke to that day. Most of all, however, I thank all those who shared their intimate stories and experiences because they wanted to make life better for others. I thank them for that brave and compassionate act, for their insight and for creating such a powerful legacy.

We bear a responsibility to ensure that every citizen enjoys a fulfilling and dignified life right up until the end. However, years of harsh austerity and the cost of living crisis have made a really harsh narrative for the most vulnerable in our society, who face a disproportionate consequence of systematic poverty. The stark reality is highlighted by the “Population mortality impacts of the rising cost of living in Scotland” research that was published in the

British Medical Journal

. It mentions a projected rise in the number of premature deaths, with the rate being four times higher in deprived areas. If we are to fundamentally change people’s experiences in the final years of life, we must do more to end poverty in every other year of life.

We have heard quite a bit about the costs of terminal illness. It could happen to any of us, but the lived experience of those who are in poverty in their final moments is starkly different. We have heard a lot about the costs that are associated with terminal illness and how it pushes families into further hardship. One of the quotes that I remember from the exhibition was from Amandeep, who said, “Do we heat our house up or do we eat food? It’s very much getting to that point now.” His decision to stay at home created a significant financial burden for his mum, who became his full-time carer. It is not unusual that family members need to reduce their work hours or quit their jobs to become full-time caregivers, and when that loss of income is compounded by the additional costs of terminal illness, there is a double burden on families.

We also heard from Stacey, who should have been reserving her energy but who fought tirelessly for a year to access suitable housing. Stacey did find a home and was then relocated to a hospice. Just weeks afterwards, after Stacey passed away, her partner was asked to move out of the Glasgow property. I am sure that we can all agree that that was not right; surely we can look at doing something to avoid that sort of thing. Scotland must continue to prioritise social security to address economic inequalities, to eradicate poverty and to build financial security for all. Some progressive policies, such as the minimum income guarantee, can play a significant role in that respect.

Nobody should face a relentless battle to meet their basic human needs, and no partner should lose their home when they are struggling with losing their soul mate. I note that, although the Scottish Government is committed to eradicating poverty, today’s debate highlights that we have a very long journey ahead of us. We owe it to all the research participants, their families and citizens right across Scotland to take note of and fully embrace the research and use every devolved power that we have to ensure that everyone can live and pass with dignity, respect, comfort and choice.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

I thank Paul O’Kane for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I also take this opportunity to thank all those involved in the research for and production of the dying in the margins study, especially all the participants, some of whom are sadly no longer with us. All we can do is ensure that we use their bravery in participating in the project to improve the experiences of others and leave a lasting legacy.

I thank Marie Curie for bringing the exhibition to the Parliament and providing a briefing as well as the images from the project. The photo evidence speaks volumes about what the end of life in poverty looks like. As deputy convener of the cross-party group on poverty, I stress that we need an end to poverty in life, but we must also not forget or lose sight of those in poverty at the end of their life. The project will help to ensure that we do not.

Yesterday evening in the chamber, we talked about the impact of pancreatic cancer and how swiftly conditions can progress. One of the calls from the dying in the margins project is to ensure that terminally ill people are offered timely and affordable adaptations to their property. From experience that has been relayed to me, I know that such things can take far too long. It can be a long-running saga, and it soaks up the time and energy of those who are facing the end of life, instead of their being able to spend that time with friends and family, ensuring quality of life, being able to live well and making memories with loved ones.

The option of moving people from their homes into an already adapted property at the end of life might be a solution on paper, but it is an unwanted disruption to those who wish to stay in the home where they and their families have lived for years. It must be possible to have some creative thinking on how to prioritise or fast-track adaptations for those at the end of life, and medical equipment for individual needs must also be provided swiftly, with any costs mitigated.

The cost of living crisis has pushed up food and energy bills and transport costs, and for those living in poverty, the cost of living has hugely exacerbated the squeeze on already-squeezed budgets. Put simply, it costs money to be unwell. In rural and island areas, those costs represent a greater proportion of budgets. We need a change in the criteria to include those at the end of life, and we should provide increased support to mitigate high energy bills. Although the news yesterday assured us that inflation has now reduced, a figure on a spreadsheet does not lead to milk, bread and other basics falling in cost.

Heating, washing and medical equipment are used more often by those living with medical conditions and at the end of their life. As the Marie Curie briefing highlights, carers are struggling to make ends meet, including 41 per cent of those on carers allowance. Many carers never consider themselves to be carers, as they are partners, parents, friends and children. Indeed, we should recognise that children of younger working-age terminally ill people are vulnerable, too.

Carers’ contributions should not be diminished. Their supportive role is critical to the person whom they care for and to wider society, and there needs to be comprehensive support both for those at the end of life and for their carers. Moreover, once the person is no longer with us, support must be available for families and carers, because after-life costs can have a huge impact on top of the emotional cost.

This is all about dignity, comfort, security and respect. Poverty should not be a trap for anyone at any stage in life.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I thank my friend Paul O’Kane for lodging the motion. The study by the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie, supported by the Economic and Social Research Council and led by Dr Naomi Richards, is all the more important because we know that life expectancy in Scotland is not going up—it is coming down. We know that, by 2040, up to 10,000 more people than now will be dying, with end-of-life support needs, in Scotland; that poverty and inequality are rising and fuelling premature mortality; and that people are dying before their time.

The fact that much of that is hidden, socially invisible, out of sight and silent is not acceptable; it should not be politically invisible, out of sight or silent. What that important research does is describe the shame of poverty—not the shame of those who are living in poverty but our shame that we allow it to exist at all.

The story told in the dying in the margins report is both harrowing and uplifting. Margaret Mitchell’s images are beautiful. The people in them are beautiful. They bear witness to the real lives of real people in the world as it really is. They are stories, often in the past tense, because most of those beautiful souls are dead, but they are not historical. They are a portrait of what is happening now. It is a mirror up close to the grinding poverty in Scotland today, which strips too many people of human dignity and basic human rights at their time of life, and at their time of death.

That serves as a reminder that being poor is not a simple lack of income and wealth, and that alone; it is also a lack of power. I say to the minister and to members of this Parliament that it is not good enough for us to simply denounce that. The question for those of us with power is: what are we going to do about it?

Are we going to implement the report’s key recommendations on housing, on health and on support for front-line workers? What are we going to do to build a compassionate, decent, humane, democratic and equal society? There is a vicious cycle at work here: if you live in poverty, you are more likely to get sick and to live in poor and overcrowded housing, which has a direct link to poor health, both physical and mental.

We do not just want the amelioration of poverty palliatives; we demand fundamental change. We live in an age of extremes: extreme wealth and privilege on the one hand and indescribable poverty, misery and despair on the other. It is a self-evident truth that we live in a class-based society, that there is a class system, that the rich are so rich only because the poor are so poor, and that there is a huge concentration of power in the hands of a few.

We need to change that at its very root—to change the balance of power in order to win equality not just of opportunity but of outcomes, so that people do not just live and survive but prosper and flourish. That is about the standard of living, but it is also about the standard of dying. It is about social cohesion and solidarity and about the equal worth of all. Above all else, it is about challenging and changing all the assumptions of the existing social order and replacing them with an ethical, a better and, I would argue, a more socialist alternative.

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

I commend Paul O’Kane for bringing this members’ business debate on the dying in the margins project to Parliament. I thank Marie Curie and the University of Glasgow for their work in capturing the stories, both in the written word and in stunning and poignant images, of the lived experience of those with terminal illnesses and conditions as they approach the end of life. Most of all, I thank those who participated in the study—those who were approaching the end of life and their loved ones—for sharing their stories with great openness and incredible dignity and courage.

I was very lucky, as a few of us were, to meet the loved ones of some of those who participated in the dying in the margins study before First Minister’s question time today, and I also saw those poignant photographs of participants during the summer, at an exhibition in Glasgow’s Mitchell library.

As the convener of the Scottish Parliament’s cross-party group on palliative care, and with Marie Curie based in my constituency, I have a particular interest in the area. However, we must all do what we can to ensure that for those living with a terminal condition and approaching the end of life, in their last few weeks and months, they have as much quality of life as possible and are as comfortable and dignified as possible. We must do all that we can to ensure that people are not dying in the margins.

Inappropriate housing has been mentioned, and it is a clear theme from the dying in the margins project. I know from my constituency case load the challenges with which someone can be presented when they are unable to get swift and suitable adaptations as they approach the end of life. Indeed, I remember a members’ business debate that I held regarding the constructive work that we were trying to do on securing such adaptations for people with motor neurone disease. I think that Maree Todd was the minister at that time.

I again request that consideration be given to establishing a fast-track process for those approaching the end of life. Lack of adaptations can lead to social isolation, compromised safety and dignity and loved ones ending up in hospital or a hospice, as opposed to ending their days at home. I am reminded of Max from the study. Max’s friend, whom I was fortunate to meet earlier, was quoted as saying that he did a runner from the hospice to get back to his dog. That made me smile, because my father tried to escape from a hospice just a week or so before he died. He did not succeed, but he was proud that he had the energy to try. Therefore, Max’s story landed with me on a personal level.

It is also evident from the dying in the margins project that, even when a housing move is secured, it is often during the last few days of life. I saw that from my constituency casework. We saw how loved ones often do not have security of tenancy when they are bereaved, and the impact that that has on them was highlighted strikingly in the study when Joost lost his wife, Stacey. Our Government has a housing bill coming to the Parliament next year, and that might be an opportunity to address some of those issues. I want to work in partnership with the Government to make that happen.

I also note that Mr O’Kane has requested a meeting, and I look forward to attending. The cross-party group on palliative care should have something fundamental to take forward on a cross-party basis.

There were clear financial issues running through the project’s outputs in relation to terminal conditions, and calls were made on the Scottish and UK Governments. I will offer two reasonable requests that were made.

Can we do more in Scotland to support the energy costs of people living with terminal conditions? The additional cost of running medical equipment at home is unfunded by the NHS or local authorities. There are other asks of the Scottish Government in relation to the cost of living. I know that budgets are tight, but can we have a wee look at that again?

There are also asks of the UK Government. If I was diagnosed with a terminal condition while an MSP, my pension would be automatic and I would get a lump sum. People who are diagnosed with terminal conditions in the UK should get their UK pensions early. In my constituency, too many people pay into a pension pot all their life and never draw out a penny because of their life expectancy. That has to change also.

This is not the end of the story for those dying in the margins. Some have now passed, but their legacy will live on. It is up to all of us in the Parliament to ensure that that happens.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I, too, thank Paul O’Kane for instigating the debate, and I thank members for their powerful contributions. I, too, had the pleasure of visiting the exhibition at the University of Glasgow. I use the word “pleasure”, because it was a pleasure. The honesty of the photographs and the stories really hit home when I visited the exhibition. There were levels of serenity and acceptance, as well as the colourful clutter of Liz’s flat. All the other speakers have mentioned Max’s dog, Lily, and his great escape to be home with her. The other thing that really struck home for me was Andy’s Post-it notes and the connection that they gave him with his daughter and granddaughter. That was very, very powerful.

I pay tribute to the individuals and their families who took part in the project. I was truly inspired by their courage and strength in sharing their stories at the most difficult times of their lives. I have had conversations with the researchers but, sadly, I have not yet met any of the families. However, in response to Paul O’Kane’s request, I should say that I would be very happy to do so. There is a recognition that they were all doing this to try and change things or, as Paul O’Kane said, to “shine a bright light” on the situation, and I thank them very much for that.

As a Government, we are committed to ensuring that everyone has the dignity, respect and care necessary to their condition right up to the end of their life. That is comprehensive care, as Beatrice Wishart described. We want Scotland to be a place where people and communities can come together to support and care for each other—Ruth Maguire’s speech really emphasised this—and talk openly about planning ahead for when our health changes, and about dying and bereavement. I am sure that we can all reflect on conversations that we wish we had had with our own family members. I am certainly in that position. I would also like to reflect on what Carol Mochan said about affordability. I had a long conversation with a celebrant who emphasised that and the importance of a funeral as part of the grieving process.

One way to start having those conversations is through future care planning, which involves enabling people to talk with health and care professionals about what matters to them. The conversations are recorded and shared as a plan so that the care and support that the person subsequently receives honour that plan. Through the new palliative care strategy that we are developing, we are prioritising work on future care planning, looking at what information is available, the systems that are in place and what can be done to promote the use of such planning across Scotland. The strategy will aim to ensure that everyone who needs it receives well co-ordinated, timely and high-quality palliative care, and care around death and bereavement support, based on their needs and preferences. That support will be available to anyone who needs it regardless of age, illness or socioeconomic background.

Being diagnosed with a life-limiting illness is undoubtedly one of the most challenging things that a person can go through. No person or their family should have to worry about their finances at such a difficult time. That is why the Scottish Government ensures that adult disability benefit applications from people with a terminal illness are fast-tracked to provide them with the support that they are entitled to as quickly as possible, as Collette Stevenson noted. We also ensure that those who are terminally ill automatically receive the highest rates of assistance that they are entitled to, with no award reviews. They are eligible for that support straight away, with no qualifying period.

I would like to take the time to recognise the incredible contribution that Scotland’s unpaid carers make to our communities. The pressures that many carers face are well known to most of us. Because of that, my Government is investing more than £88 million per year in local carer support through local authority funding under the Carers (Scotland) Act 2016. The Scottish Government also recognises the extra pressures on people caring for someone with a terminal illness. We have therefore made sure that they have accelerated rights to support in their caring role.

We recognise that too many people are living in poverty, which is why we are committed to breaking that cycle of poverty in Scotland, as Richard Leonard noted. We are providing more support for social justice than ever before, with our spending on social security benefits forecast to increase by nearly £1 billion in 2024-25. That includes investment to increase the value of our Scottish child payment, funeral support payment and all disability and carers benefits in line with inflation from April 2024, with an anticipated investment of around £300 million. We are also making £83 million available for discretionary housing payments this year to fully mitigate the bedroom tax, to mitigate the benefit cap as fully as possible and to mitigate other UK Government welfare cuts.

We are investing to deliver more affordable and social homes, with £3.5 billion being made available over this parliamentary session. We are taking forward a review of the current housing adaption system, an issue that was raised by Paul O’Kane, Bob Doris and other members. We will make recommendations on how best to improve and streamline the system.

I am aware of and concerned about the pressure on household budgets, including those of disabled people, who are disproportionately impacted by energy costs. My colleague the Minister for Energy and the Environment continually urges the UK Government to take action—she has done so again this week—by using its financial and energy market levers, just as we are doing within our limited powers and fixed budget.

That is why we continue to call on the UK Government to urgently introduce a social tariff mechanism that would provide a much-needed safety net for vulnerable consumers, including disabled consumers and those who rely on medical equipment at home.

I have an awful lot more to say, but I am aware of the time. However, if the Presiding Officer is content, I will put that in a letter to everyone who has spoken.

I recognise that there is more that we can all do. As I said, we are happy to meet with Paul O’Kane.

I again thank those who allowed their stories to be told and the many people from across all sectors who deliver palliative and end-of-life care. The commitment and dedication that that takes, often in extremely challenging and upsetting circumstances, cannot be overstated. I would like to finish by offering my personal thanks for all that you do.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, minister. I thank members for their co-operation in sticking to their allotted speaking times. That concludes the debate. I close this meeting until 2 pm.

13:41 Meeting suspended.

14:01 On resuming—

Business Motion

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-

11310, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on a change to the business programme. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press their request-to-speak button now. I call George Adam to move the motion.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees to the following revision to the programme of business for Thursday 16 November 2023—

delete

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions:

Education and Skills

and insert

followed by

Personal Statement: Michael Matheson

followed by

Portfolio Questions:

Education and Skills.—[

George Adam

]

The Presiding Officer

I call Alexander Burnett to speak to and move amendment S6M-11310.1.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

Today’s business motion gives Michael Matheson the chance to outline his reasons for attempting to charge Scottish taxpayers around £11,000 for roaming charges while he was on holiday in Morocco. It has also allowed the First Minister, at First Minister’s questions today, to deflect and avoid questions from Douglas Ross on his understanding of the scandal, including whether he still backs claims that the expense claim was legitimate and for parliamentary purposes only.

The current proposal does not allow for any form of scrutiny of the content of Mr Matheson’s statement. At the end of First Minister’s questions, in response to Stephen Kerr’s point of order, both Mr Matheson and the First Minister intimated that Mr Matheson would be willing to answer questions following his statement. Therefore, the only option that the Parliament has open to it is to suspend standing orders rule 13.1.4 to allow for either questions or debate on the content of a statement.

Given that both the Government and the lead Opposition party have accepted that that should happen, there is a clear parliamentary majority for a suspension of standing orders to allow for that questioning to occur. It is only right and proper that the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care is questioned following his statement, given the long and growing list of questions that have arisen over the past week, and which have become a distraction from his role as health secretary.

I hope that the Minister for Parliamentary Business heard the First Minister indicate his willingness for questions to be allowed and is able to support our amendment, without a division, to prevent any further delay to this afternoon’s proceedings.

I move amendment S6M-11310.1, to insert at end:

“(b) that the Parliament agrees that, for the purposes of consideration of the Personal Statement: Michael Matheson, Rule 13.1.4 of Standing Orders is suspended.”

The Presiding Officer

I call George Adam to respond on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

I will take a moment to go through some of the detail. Mr Matheson made a request to the Presiding Officer yesterday to make a personal statement and offered to take questions.

As members will know, and as the Presiding Officer reiterated during a point of order earlier, taking a statement is at the discretion of the Presiding Officer, who notifies the Parliamentary Bureau. The standing orders are clear that a personal statement must not be debated, so a variation to standing orders is required if members wish to debate the statement today. Therefore, if the Presiding Officer decides to suspend standing orders to allow for questions, I would have no issue with that whatsoever.

The Presiding Officer

The first question is that amendment S6M-11310.1, in the name of Alexander Burnett, which seeks to amend business motion S6M-11310, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on a change to the business programme, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Amendment agreed to.

The next question is that business motion

S6M-11310, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, as amended, on a change to the business programme, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Motion,

as amended, agreed to,

(a) That the Parliament agrees to the following revision to the programme of business for Thursday 16 November 2023—

delete

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Education and Skills

and insert

followed by

Personal Statement: Michael Matheson

followed by

Portfolio Questions:

Education and Skills

(b) that the Parliament agrees that, for the purposes of consideration of the Personal Statement: Michael Matheson, Rule 13.1.4 of Standing Orders is suspended.

Personal Statement

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a personal statement by Michael Matheson.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I thank the Presiding Officer for the opportunity to make a personal statement to Parliament.

I want to address the significant level of interest in the data roaming charges associated with my parliamentary iPad during a family holiday in Morocco between 27 December 2022 and 3 January this year.

First, I want to apologise to the chamber for the cost of the roaming charges. As I set out in my public statement on Friday, I accept that the charges have come about as a result of my not updating the SIM card in my iPad to that of the new contract provider. I also recognise that I should have informed the Parliament’s information technology department in advance of travelling of my holiday plans and of the fact that I would be taking two devices. That was my responsibility and I accept it in full.

I therefore think that it is important to set out to the chamber all the facts of what happened and, in particular, exactly how the charges came about. I travelled to Morocco with my family—my wife and two teenage boys—on 27 December. On the first day of the holiday, 28 December, I contacted the Parliament’s IT department and told it that I was out of the country and that my parliamentary phone was not working but that my iPad was working. In the course of two phone calls, after an initial effort to get the phone working, the Parliament’s IT department advised that it had checked with the network operator, which explained that my data package was suitable for use in Morocco. It also advised that I should try to remove and replace the SIM card from my phone, as the problem might be a fault with the SIM card. Nothing in those discussions led me to believe that there was any risk in using my iPad while in Morocco.

I want to be clear with colleagues that I did not knowingly run up the roaming charges bill; quite the reverse—I checked what I should do before I used my iPad. My mistake—I wholly accept this—was not to have sorted all that out long before I went to Morocco.

In January this year, I was informed of the high data charges that had accrued to my iPad. Of course, I queried the charges and Parliament confirmed that it had contacted the provider for more information. At that time, I handed my iPad over to the Parliament for it to be checked. It is important to be clear that, throughout this time, I was not clear what had caused the high charges. I had not used the iPad for any purpose other than parliamentary and constituency business and could not understand how the costs could be so high. Parliament confirmed that the network provider was unable to give further details of what had led to the charges. In the absence of a clear explanation of how such a large bill could have happened, I thought it appropriate to make a contribution, through office allowances, of £3,000 towards the cost. Following the publication of my expenses last week, there was significant media coverage of the charges.

It was at that point—last Thursday night—when I returned home that I was made aware by my wife that other members of our family had made use of the iPad data. That was the first that I knew that the data had been used by anyone else. I had previously checked that, but the truth emerged only after the story had been in the news. I should have pressed harder; perhaps I should have been less willing to believe what I had been told. Presiding Officer, I need to be very clear with you and my colleagues that the responsibility for the iPad is mine. The responsibility for the data usage is mine. That is why my wife and I made the immediate decision to reimburse the full costs to the Parliament.

I contacted parliamentary authorities the next day to make clear arrangements to reimburse the full costs of the roaming charges and to issue a personal statement to explain that decision. In my statement, which was issued last Friday, I made no reference to the use of data by my family. As a parent, I wanted to protect my family from being part of the associated political and media scrutiny, which is something that I believe any parent would want to do. I am a father first and foremost. I can see now that it is just not possible to explain the data usage without explaining my family’s role. The simple truth is that they were watching football matches.

On Tuesday, I told the First Minister that members of my family had made use of the iPad data. Yesterday evening, I provided him with a full account of the matter and of my intention to inform the Parliament.

Disclosing the information about my family has been extremely difficult. Mistakes have been made by me and by my family, and mistakes have been made in the way in which I have handled the matter. I should have sorted the SIM card and I should have investigated what happened more thoroughly. I accept that, take responsibility and apologise unreservedly. That is why the costs have now been fully reimbursed to the Parliament. That is why I have referred myself to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body under section 7 of the MSP code of conduct, so that it can consider whether to investigate the matter further to address any remaining questions to the Parliament’s full satisfaction. I take very seriously the reputation of the Scottish Parliament, of which I have always strived to be a diligent member since its restoration in 1999. My wish is that I can now focus fully on the vital duties that I have as MSP for Falkirk West and as health secretary. I hope that members will accept my explanation, my self-referral under the code of conduct and my unreserved apology.

The Presiding Officer

Given the Parliament’s decision to suspend rule 13.1.4 of standing orders, I will allow a period of around 10 minutes for questions. Any members who wish to put a question should press their request-to-speak button now.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I am grateful to Michael Matheson for the personal statement that he has just provided. I can fully see the difficulty that it has caused him. However, questions remain. During his statement, Michael Matheson said that he could not understand how he had racked up so many data roaming charges. He went on to say that he could not explain the data usage—but, of course, he did explain it. He told the Parliament, when he claimed for expenses, that it was a legitimate expense. He promised the Parliament that it was a legitimate expense. He gave the Parliament written assurances that it was a legitimate expense.

If, as has now transpired, his son was watching football, why did he claim that he was doing parliamentary work? If he could not understand at the time or could not explain the data usage, how could he say with 100 per cent certainty to the Parliament, when claiming £11,000 of taxpayers’ money, that he was doing parliamentary work? The two stories do not align. It seems that Parliament was misled when he made that claim. Does Michael Matheson agree with that?

He also said in his statement that he looked for £3,000 to be taken out of his office cost allowance. Was that his only request, or did he seek more money and more support out of available budgets?

He said that he made the immediate decision, on hearing from his wife, to repay the money, but in the statement that he made to the media and the Scottish public, he said that the issue was a direct consequence of using an outdated SIM. Did he mislead the Scottish people by using that argument, rather than what we now know to be the case?

The health secretary has belatedly been forced to be honest about the circumstances, but we cannot ignore or forget the fact that, months ago, he wanted the Scottish taxpayer to pay £11,000 for his roaming bill. That roaming bill was accrued not due to parliamentary duties, which he claimed, and, therefore, he falsely claimed that money. Will the health secretary accept that?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

In my statement, I was clear that, at the time when I was notified of the high charges associated with my iPad, the Parliament’s IT department contacted the network provider to try to find out more details about how the costs had been associated with my iPad. Unfortunately, the network provider was unable to provide that information to the Parliament, and, therefore, we were unable to identify how the costs of the roaming charges associated with my iPad had been accrued.

At that time, I passed my iPad to the IT department to consider whether there was an issue with it and for it to look at the device. I also made a contribution of £3,000 to help meet the costs associated with the Parliament’s IT department in meeting the overall costs. That was something that I volunteered to make to the Parliament directly.

The member referred to my statement last Friday, when I made no reference to the fact that that data usage had occurred through members of my family. As I set out in my statement, this has been a very challenging and emotional time for my family. I chose not to provide details of that in my statement on Friday, because it would implicate my children in this issue. I chose not to provide that information in order to try to protect them from the inevitable media scrutiny and political interest that that would generate. I did that as a father, to protect them.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I thank Michael Matheson for his personal statement. I think that anyone who has had teenage children will understand what has happened, but what people will not understand is the cover-up. That has only had the effect of heightening the media scrutiny, which understandably he did not want for his family.

I regret to say that the failure to replace the SIM card, despite reminders over several years, is wholly negligent; I regret that the failure to keep the iPad secure is equally negligent; and I regret that, on repeated occasions, the cabinet secretary gave assurances to this Parliament and made statements in the press that were wholly incorrect.

There is a serious question of judgment here, but while the cabinet secretary was focused on this mess of his own making, accident and emergency waiting times have gone up this year to the highest level, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde was named as a suspect in a corporate homicide case and 820,000 patients are waiting too long on national health service waiting lists for treatment.

Does

Michael Matheson

not believe that, as a result of this serious question of judgment, people will understandably have lost confidence in his ability to do his job as the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care? I have to ask why he did not investigate the use of data when the issue was consistently raised with him by parliamentary authorities. Why is it only now that he asked his family what actually happened?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I wholly accept that the data usage and the cost associated with it are my responsibility. That is why, last Thursday, we as a family made the decision to reimburse the Parliament for the full costs associated with that.

My use of the iPad when I was on holiday was purely for constituency and parliamentary purposes. That was my understanding of all that had happened with the iPad when it travelled with us. However, it is clear that things have changed as a result of the information that I now have.

I will be very clear with Jackie Baillie. I asked for, and the IT department sought to get, further details from the network operator on exactly what the iPad had accrued the charges for, but the network operator was unable to provide that information. I also discussed the matter with my family, and I received assurances at that time. Had I known that my family made use of the data at that time, I would have met the costs associated with that. However, I did not know that. That is why, at that time, I could not understand how the costs had been accrued. When it became apparent that we had accrued the costs as a result of actions in my family, we took the immediate decision to reimburse the full amount to the Parliament. I hope that Jackie Baillie will take my reassurance that, as soon as that became apparent to us, we as a family decided to ensure that Parliament was reimbursed for the full costs associated with that.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s statement. Has he engaged with the Parliament on data capping on parliamentary devices in the future?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I am aware that the Parliament is undertaking a review of the existing arrangements that it has in place. With my own painful experience of the matter, I am more than happy to engage with it to offer it any assistance that I can from that experience in order to ensure that no other member experiences this type of difficulty at some point in the future.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

For a family member to access the cabinet secretary’s iPad, passwords would need to be shared. Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether he has shared his device’s passwords with anyone? Does he accept that that goes against general data protection regulation rules, given the sensitive information that is held on parliamentary devices? When did he first share with the First Minister that his family members used his iPad during his family holiday in Morocco?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I set out the information that I provided to the First Minister in my statement.

When I engaged with the Parliament’s IT department on the difficulties that I had with my phone not operating, the advice that I was given was that I could use the iPad for hotspotting purposes. I had not used a hotspot before. My son helped to facilitate that provision. That is how there was the ability to access the data that was provided within the iPad during our holiday period.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for his statement.

Yesterday, we spoke in the chamber about the Nolan principles of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. We have seen across the chamber and outside it the challenge that the statement has been. I respect that.

In MyExpenses, which we use in the Parliament to authorise payments out of the budget that is provided by the Parliament from the taxpayer, we certify that the expenditure arose and was appropriate. That was not correct in this case, was it?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

The cost was accrued to the Parliament’s IT provision, not through my office allowances, and it was funded centrally by the Scottish Parliament. Therefore, there was no claim for the £11,000 through my parliamentary office. I volunteered to make a contribution to the cost, given the costs that the Parliament faced as a result of the high roaming charges.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that standards in public office are very important and that it is therefore right that he has referred himself to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I have

been in the Parliament for 24 years and have always sought to maintain the high standards of the Parliament in how I conduct myself—not just as a minister, but as an MSP—in how my constituency office operates in supporting constituents, and in how we utilise the public resources with which we are provided in order to undertake our job. They are standards that I have always sought to apply and that I will continue to seek to apply. I have acknowledged the errors that have been made in this instance and have described the actions that I took, as soon as those errors became apparent to us, to address them by fully reimbursing the Parliament for the costs.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes the personal statement.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. We have had a short time to question the health secretary. I wonder what opportunities there will be for further questioning, particularly given the referral to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. On Monday, in his role as a Government minister, Michael Matheson responded to a journalist’s question whether there had been “any personal use”. He said:

“No. As I made very clear—”

et cetera, et cetera.

We have just heard from Michael Matheson that he knew on Thursday evening that there had been personal use. Will the investigation by the corporate body look into the conflicting statements that Michael Matheson has given to the Parliament today, what he said in his role as a Government minister on Monday and the apparent revelation from his family on Thursday evening?

Secondly, the First Minister refused to answer questions about the issue at First Minister’s question time today—in particular, my question whether he still believed that the claim was legitimate. I can only assume now that he does not. When did he become aware of the matter, however? Michael Matheson said in his statement that he spoke—

Members

That is not a point of order.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Michael Matheson said in his statement that he spoke to the First Minister last night, advising—

Members

This is a question.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

He advised that he would be making a personal statement. Between Thursday evening last week and yesterday, when did he inform the First Minister that he had found out that the device had been used for personal reasons?

Finally, Presiding Officer—

The Presiding Officer

Mr Ross, questions to other members are not points of order. Points of order are intended to question whether proper procedures are being or have been followed. They relate to matters that are covered in the standing orders. I ask you to conclude very quickly.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I prefaced my remarks by asking how Parliament can get those answers, given that we have had a very tight timescale today. I was also asking about the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body investigation.

The Presiding Officer

All members will be aware that, where there are matters to be pursued further, they should liaise with their business managers, who can pursue those matters with the Parliamentary Bureau at its meetings. The corporate body shall, of course, consider any referral.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

My colleague Meghan Gallacher asked Michael Matheson a very important question to do with the security of parliamentary devices—

The Presiding Officer

I will stop you at that point, Mr Kerr.

As I have just said, if you want to avail yourself of the standing orders and look at them with regard to points of order, you will see that points of order are to cover whether or not proper procedures are being or have been followed in the chamber in the course of our parliamentary business. This is not, I suggest, the most appropriate venue for raising the question that you now wish to put.

We will move on to the next item of business, which is portfolio questions. I will allow a moment for those on the front benches to arrange themselves.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. While respecting what you have just said from the chair—that this is not the appropriate forum for asking about the security of parliamentary devices, which is an issue that will very much be of concern to the public—I ask your advice as to what the appropriate public forum is for that question to be properly addressed. What we have heard this afternoon is a clear transgression of the general data protection regulation. It is a very serious matter, indeed.

The Presiding Officer

Your comments are on the record, Mr Kerr. I will look at them, I will review them and I will be back in touch with you. I, or the most appropriate person with regard to the issues that Mr Kerr raises, will be in touch with him.

Education and Skills

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is portfolio question time. On this occasion, the portfolio is education and skills. I invite members who wish to ask a supplementary question to press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.

Teacher Numbers

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what clarification on teacher number arrangements will be provided to local authorities this year. (S6O-02728)

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

Excellent teachers make all the difference in our classrooms. They are vital to ensuring that we make further progress on closing the poverty-related attainment gap, which is why we have invested to ensure that we have the lowest pupil to teacher ratio in the United Kingdom.

In this year’s budget, we are providing £145.5 million to protect teacher and support staff numbers across local authorities, on condition that those numbers are maintained at 2022 census levels. That data will be available following publication of “Summary statistics for schools in Scotland” next month.

We have been clear with councils that, if teacher numbers are not maintained nationally, we reserve the right to withhold or recoup funding that has been given for that purpose.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

In recent years, there has been growing concern about the number of temporary contracts for teachers, which has led to increased job insecurity in the education sector. What precisely has the Scottish Government done to end such job insecurity for our hard-working teachers?

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

The member raises an important point about temporary contracts. It is worth saying that the number of permanent contracts has remained relatively static since 2007, at about 80 per cent, but I accept the member’s challenge. It is also worth saying that the number of teachers in our schools has increased by 8 per cent since December 2014.

More broadly, there is more work that we can do to encourage people into the profession. In the programme for government, I have committed to working with our professional associations and trade unions on a campaign to encourage people into teaching as a meaningful and worthwhile career.

On the member’s point on job insecurity, I point out that employment responsibility sits with local authorities. However, this morning, I attended the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland’s national conference, where the issue of recruitment came up. I have asked a number of experts to give me advice on our education workforce modelling analysis, which is an external piece of work that I have commissioned to inform our decisions on education workforce planning in future years. I hope that that will very much address the member’s point, but it is worth saying that the picture has not changed markedly since 2007.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I have received a number of requests for supplementary questions. I will try to get them all in, but they will need to be brief, as will the responses.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Having the best pupil to teacher ratio in the UK is vital in providing an excellent education to our children and closing the attainment gap. What additional support does the Scottish Government provide to local authorities to close that gap and deliver the highest possible quality of education for our children?

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

We provide a number of forms of support directly to local authorities. As the member said, we have the lowest pupil to teacher ratio in the whole of the UK. In Scotland, we invest more per pupil in schools than is invested in other parts of the UK. Over this parliamentary session, we are investing £1 billion in the Scottish attainment challenge to help to close the poverty-related attainment gap. We are also providing free school meals to more than 280,000 pupils in primaries 1 to 5 and in special schools. We have provided funding for additional digital devices and internet connections in a number of parts of the school estate. We have also lifted the national minimum school clothing grant to £120 and £150 for primary and secondary school pupils respectively. All those measures help to support excellent education for all our young people.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

In some geographical and subject areas, including in science, technology, engineering and mathematics—STEM—there are shortages of teachers. The teaching bursary scheme to attract career changers is key to addressing such shortages and spreading opportunity. However, the number of people in receipt of the bursary has decreased from 180 when it was introduced, in 2018, to only 84 in 2022. Will the cabinet secretary confirm whether the number of applications for the bursary has decreased, or has the Government chosen to cap the number of bursaries that are issued?

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

I do not have in front of me the specific answer to Pam Duncan-Glancy’s question, but I am more than happy to write to her. She is absolutely right that we provide additional investment for the STEM bursary. This year, the bursary is for the first time supporting Gaelic-medium education, which is a focus for the Government.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

This week, I was contacted by yet another teacher who gave up a career in industry to take up teaching. She was told just this week that no permanent contract is available for her, although she meets all the criteria. The cabinet secretary talked about the new modelling mechanism that she is looking at, but we have had mechanisms for years. I do not understand why supply and demand are so out of kilter. Will she explain that?

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

I am not aware of which local authority Willie Rennie alludes to, but one challenge is that we have 32 different approaches to teacher recruitment across the country and varying approaches to how probationers enter the system, as I know from experience. The local authority in the area that Willie Rennie and I represent has a generic approach to teaching interviews, which can sometimes be challenging for people who want to enter the profession in Fife in the middle of the academic year, which is where we are. I am more than happy to look at the specifics in the case that Willie Rennie raised.

Of course, local authorities employ our teachers directly, which is why we have ring fenced an additional £145 million to protect teacher numbers. That is hugely important and is a sign of investment from the Government. However, ultimately, our local authorities employ our teachers, so I will continue to work with them, through the workforce plan that I referred to, to help to improve the situation.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 2 has been withdrawn.

Probationer Teachers (Preference Waiver Scheme)

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to increase the number of probationer teachers choosing the preference waiver scheme. (S6O-02730)

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

The preference waiver payment is an important component of the teacher induction scheme that provides a financial incentive for probationer teachers to consider undertaking their probation year anywhere in Scotland. Information that is provided to prospective probationer teachers clearly outlines all the options that are available to them, including the benefits of opting for the preference waiver programme. In addition, the strategic board for teacher education, which is made up of a range of key education stakeholders, is looking at the recruitment and retention of teachers, which includes considering issues that relate to the early phase of a teacher’s career.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

Figures that were released last month show that only 6.8 per cent of probationers opted to choose the preference waiver scheme. Furthermore, local authorities across Scotland received 657 fewer probationer teachers than they had requested, and rural areas were particularly affected.

It is clear that the situation is unsustainable. What action is the cabinet secretary taking to improve the preference waiver scheme and its uptake, so that more probationers opt to take up the offer next year?

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

I should probably declare an interest, as I benefited from the preference waiver payment back in 2009, when I went to Moray as a probationer teacher.

The waiver payment is set at £6,000 for primary and £8,000 for secondary. As I said in my initial response, it very much encourages teachers to consider going anywhere. We know that there are teacher recruitment challenges in parts of Scotland, and the preference waiver scheme helps to address those.

However, the member is right that there seems to have been a shift in the willingness of some of our student teachers to tick the box and go anywhere. That is problematic, because the scheme is not as popular as it once was. A few weeks ago, I held a round-table session on the issue with a number of probationers, and I heard from them a reticence to move around the country that perhaps did not exist before the pandemic.

Such challenges do not arise just in the education system—I know that they exist in the national health service and in justice, so the situation is not unique to education.

In response to another member, I set out some of the action that I am taking. The strategic board for teacher education will work with the General Teaching Council for Scotland, Education Scotland and the Scottish Council of Deans of Education to look at—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, cabinet secretary—I have to move on to supplementary questions.

Jim Fairlie (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

How will the Scottish Government continue to promote the teaching profession as a rewarding and valued career, particularly in rural communities such as mine—Perthshire South and Kinross-shire?

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

We value our teachers highly. Through the recent historic 14 per cent pay deal, teachers in our classrooms are the highest paid in the United Kingdom. We are also supporting councils with the additional £145 million that I mentioned in response to Mr Rennie.

As part of investing in our schools under the programme for government, we have a commitment to support our teaching profession by working with our partners on a joint campaign to promote teaching. As I said, the preference waiver payment, which Mr Balfour mentioned, is a really important part of that, as it gives probationer teachers financial incentives to consider undertaking their probation year in remote and rural areas, where the need is greatest.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Katy Clark has a brief supplementary question.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Probationary teachers often do not feel sufficiently incentivised to move to other parts of Scotland to teach, and they are also put off by precarious contracts. Does the Scottish Government intend to set out in guidance that local authorities should seek to eliminate the use of zero-hours and fixed-term contracts, given that we know that continuity of teaching is very much in pupils’ interests, too?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please answer briefly, cabinet secretary.

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

I go back to the point that about 80 per cent of our jobs in teaching are permanent posts. On the member’s question about fixed-term contracts, some of those contracts arise when people go on maternity leave, so we should be mindful of that. Ultimately, local authorities are the employers, but I am committed, through the work with the strategic board for teacher education and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, to seeing what more we might be able to do to improve the situation.

Schools (Abusive and Violent Behaviour)

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether schools should publish monthly reports on any reported incidents of abusive and violent behaviour. (S6O-02731)

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

Our national guidance makes clear that all schools and local authorities are expected to record all incidents of violent behaviour. Recording and monitoring play an essential role in helping schools to identify recurring patterns of behaviour and ensure early intervention and appropriate support.

Members are aware that September’s summit on relationships and behaviour in schools focused on recording and monitoring incidents. My aim from the summit process is to identify practical actions that we need to take in order to make progress, including creating a culture where staff are empowered to record incidents. Local data must then be used to ensure that schools have an oversight of issues and are responding effectively.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Hardly a week goes by

without us seeing, through the media, another report of another school where behaviour has broken down. I appreciate that the cabinet secretary has held two summits and intends to hold another one, but when is she going to bring forward to the Parliament something that shows the outcome of those summits and the action that her Government intends to take? Will she put in the necessary resources to go with that action?

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

I thank the member

for his question and I know that he takes a keen interest in the matter, as I have done, of course, since it was first raised in the chamber, not long after my appointment.

The point that the member makes about action will be addressed in a statement that I intend to bring to the Parliament in the next two weeks. That statement will talk to the accurate national picture. It is important for the chamber to remember that we have not carried out research on behaviour in Scottish schools since 2016, because the last round of data was in 2016. There should have been a round of data in 2020, but that was not possible due to the pandemic.

Publishing an accurate national picture is hugely important, and I intend to come to the chamber with an identified action plan for how we can help local authorities to improve the current situation.

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

As we mark anti-bullying week, what guidance does the Scottish Government provide to help schools to tackle bullying?

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

Our national anti-bullying guidance, “Respect for All”, provides an overarching framework for all adults who work with children and young people, to address all types of bullying. We have also published guidance for schools and local authorities on recording and monitoring bullying incidents, and we are currently undertaking a review of “Respect for All”, which is supported by a working group of key stakeholders. The planning is under way to engage with parents, carers, children and young people as part of that review, and the updated guidance is expected to be published next year.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Alex Rowley asked a spot-on question and got no answer. There is still no action plan to tackle incidents of abusive and violent behaviour, and there is no guidance for school staff. When will there be an action plan?

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

I do not think that Mr Kerr was paying attention to my response to Mr Rowley, because I was clear that I will bring a statement to the Parliament to identify action from the Government, while recognising, of course, that the statutory responsibility for responding to bullying incidents rests with our local authorities.

Skills and Training Planning

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

5. To ask the Scottish Government, in relation to its planning for skills and training provision, what information it has on the skills needs of Scotland’s economy in specific vocations over the next five years. (S6O-02732)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I apologise to the chamber that, with the Deputy Presiding Officer’s agreement, I will have to leave after I have answered this question.

Through our purpose and principles for post-school education, research and skills, the Scottish Government has committed to take responsibility for skills planning and develop an approach at the national level that sees us work with partners to set clear priorities. If we are to deliver the change that is required, we need the clearest possible understanding of what Scotland’s skills needs are and will be in the future, and how we will meet them.

Skills Development Scotland regularly publishes information on regional and sectoral skills demands, and that is available on its website. We will seek to build on the extensive work that it has done, through further detailed interaction with employers, colleges and universities.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

I thank the minister for that welcome answer. As he knows, major employment sectors across the economy, including health, construction, engineering and many others, are reporting significant skills shortages. What process is the Government putting in place to quantitatively assess those needs and to align skills provision in the further and higher education systems to address them?