Scottish Parliament, 11 January 2024

308 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good morning. The first item of business is general question time. In order to get in as many members as possible, I would greatly appreciate succinct questions and responses.

Male Suicide Rates

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what work it is undertaking to reduce the rates of male suicide in Scotland, in light of the issues raised in the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s “Equality and Human Rights Monitor” report for 2023. (S6O-02950)

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

The Scottish Government and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities suicide prevention strategy, “Creating Hope Together: Scotland’s Suicide Prevention Action Plan 2022-2025”, takes a targeted approach to reaching and supporting people who are at higher risk of suicide, including men. Through the likes of targeted work with partners in the west Highlands and Skye and the “Changing room—extra time” programme, we are continuing to understand more about what helps men to reach out for support and what type of support works best. Another key part of our strategy is the building of peer support groups right across Scotland as a way to prevent suicide, which we know works well for many men.

Finally, our gender-balanced suicide prevention lived-experience panel allows us to continue to benefit from the insights of men affected by suicide. That is invaluable in helping us to prevent male suicide.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I welcome

the minister’s answer, because the suicide rate for boys and young men aged five to 24 is two times higher than that for girls and young women in the same age group. One of the recommendations in the report is that the Scottish Government sets a national equality outcome to reduce the suicide rate among five to 24-year-olds, particularly in males. Will the minister commit to implementing that?

What other recommendations from the report could be implemented to provide support to boys and young men and prevent more lives from being lost to suicide?

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

I agree with Ms Gallagher that we need to very carefully target our support for teenage boys and young men. However, when we look at suicide as a whole, the curve is U-shaped and the highest rate is in middle age, so we cannot take our eyes off any age group. We need to ensure that we have strategies that meet the needs of every age group, and we are doing that very carefully, working with partners. The programme in Skye and the west Highlands, which I mentioned, looks particularly at rural communities, where we know there is a particularly high rate and people are susceptible. We also have work going on in LGBT communities.

I am confident that we are doing the right things. We need to do more. Every suicide is preventable and every suicide has absolutely tragic consequences, so we will absolutely remain focused on tackling the issue.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Can the minister provide an update regarding work that is under way to raise awareness about suicide and to improve understanding, particularly in sectors that support groups with higher rates of suicide, which include, as we have heard, men and boys?

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

In implementing our “Creating Hope Together” policy, we are working with partners that represent high-risk groups, such as the LGBT community and other known marginalised groups, to develop tailored approaches to suicide prevention, awareness raising and support. We have taken a targeted approach to learning so that people in the workforce who are most likely to be supporting people who feel suicidal are supported. That includes people in health and social care, education, the emergency services and third sector organisations that work in local communities. We are going to extend that approach further into other key services, including homelessness support services.

The community-based supports that we fund for children and young people and adults also have a focus on distress prevention and support. Through our “Time, space, compassion” approach, we have worked hard to identify and connect services and communities that are already doing important work to support communities that are at higher risk of suicide.

Electric Buses (Glasgow)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to support the roll-out of electric buses across the Glasgow city region. (S6O-02951)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Since 2020, £62 million of Scottish Government investment has supported operators to acquire 315 zero-emission buses and supporting infrastructure to serve the Glasgow area. Of those buses, 305 are already on the road, as the remaining 10 will be by the end of March. The final phase of the Scottish zero-emission bus challenge fund is currently live, offering a further £43 million to transform the market for zero-emission buses so that they are affordable to all operators, without subsidy.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Electric vehicles go a long way in improving inner-city air quality and public health, as well as contributing to meeting the net zero target. Naturally, therefore, the decision not to award Strathclyde Partnership for Transport ScotZEB 2 funding for a new fleet of electric buses has been met with disappointment. What support can the Government offer organisations such as SPT to help them to meet their electric vehicle ambitions?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Organisations such as SPT can contact the remaining lead bidders to discuss joining their consortia ahead of the deadline for best and final bids on 19 January. Information is available from the Energy Saving Trust, which administers the scheme. I encourage all bus and coach operators and organisations to explore the range of information packs, how-to guides and case studies that have been produced by our bus decarbonisation task force, which is hosted on the Confederation of Passenger Transport website.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Given the

budget announcement that there will be no direct funding for the bus partnership fund next year, what will happen to work by the Glasgow city region bus partnership, and other partnerships, to progress bus priority measures?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

That does not necessarily relate directly to the roll-out of electric buses and the ScotZEB fund. Graham Simpson will be aware that there has been progress on bus partnerships, to support bus priority lanes. I add that his Conservative colleagues in Aberdeen have been highly critical of the work and investment that are already taking place in Aberdeen to encourage such bus lanes.

I remind Graham Simpson that we cannot have the United Kingdom Government introducing budgets, such as the one that was made by Liz Truss and her Chancellor of the Exchequer, that decimate the public finance system and introduce a capital reduction of almost 10 per cent at a time of increasing construction costs, then have him come to the chamber to ask for more money that literally does not exist because of his Conservative colleagues at Westminster.

Business Support (Highlands and Islands)

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support businesses across the Highlands and Islands region. (S6O-02952)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Our economic development agency for that region, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, provides advice, training and funding to help businesses to grow and innovate. It invested £20.1 million in 272 small businesses across the region during 2022-23, supporting 478 jobs and an increase of £122 million in turnover.

Our investment of £242.5 million in the four city region and growth deals across the Highlands and Islands will deliver significant and lasting economic benefits for businesses.

The 2024-25 Scottish budget ensures that businesses across the Highlands and Islands will continue to benefit from a competitive non-domestic rates relief package, which—according to the latest figures—includes 23,000 business properties paying no rates at all, thanks to the small business bonus scheme.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Last October, HIE’s chief executive, Stuart Black, told the Economy and Fair Work Committee that a projected cut of 4.8 per cent to HIE’s budget would affect its

“ability to work with communities at local level”.—[

Official Report, Economy and Fair Work Committee,

4 October 2023; c 7.]

Given that HIE’s total budget is now at its lowest level in more than a decade, following a cut that was three times as great as was previously forecast, does the cabinet secretary not recognise the serious damage that will be done to business confidence across communities in the Highlands and Islands?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

As our delivery agent, HIE will continue to make a key contribution to achieving the Government’s objectives through support for businesses and communities in strategic economic development. The budget provides investment of almost £67 million in 2024-25 as the first part of the Scottish Government’s commitment of up to £500 million to anchor a new offshore wind supply chain in Scotland. We expect HIE to play a key role in delivering our ambitions for that supply chain and in maximising the economic benefits therein.

I will also continue to work with HIE to ensure that it can prioritise the funding that it has received to maximise the opportunities that are available.

However, at a time when our budgets are under attack from the United Kingdom Government, I respectfully say to Donald Cameron that it is incredible that he comes here asking for more money but does not come up with an answer on where it is supposed to come from.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

Before Christmas, it emerged that the Lerwick-Kirkwall-Aberdeen Serco NorthLink ferry service costs would be hiked by an eye-watering 8.7 per cent from April 2024. That is obviously above inflation, and it will hit businesses with increased freight costs. Does the cabinet secretary consider such cost hikes on the lifeline service to be supportive of island businesses?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We will continue to work with Serco NorthLink to ensure that it provides a sustainable and supportive environment for the lifeline services that it provides. I declare an interest, having travelled on NorthLink ferries over the Christmas period in order to visit family. I will be happy to meet Beatrice Wishart to discuss the issue that she has raised.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

I welcome the Government’s commitment to supporting business in my region. There are now more than 1,200 social enterprises across the Highlands and Islands, which is the highest density in Scotland. A third of all of Scotland’s social enterprises are in rural areas, and they contribute 88,000 jobs and more than £2.3 billion to the economy. What specific support can be offered to the growing social enterprise sector in the Highlands and Islands?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We recognise the unique importance of social enterprises to business and community life across Scotland’s Highlands and Islands. Our social enterprise action plan recognises the different challenges that they face.

The Scottish Government directly funds the rural social enterprise hub, and social enterprises from the Highlands and Islands can access business support from Just Enterprise, which is a Government-funded national business support service. That support is delivered locally, often through partners such as Impact Hub Inverness. Since April 2022, we have awarded more than £600,000 of financial support directly to social enterprises in the Highlands and Islands through our delivery partner Firstport.

The Presiding Officer

Question 4 was not lodged.

Cost of Living Crisis

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

5. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what steps it is taking to address the cost of living crisis. (S6O-02954)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Despite the difficult financial settlement from the United Kingdom Government, this Government is doing everything that it can, with the powers available to it, to support people and communities through the cost of living crisis.

We are investing a record-high £6.3 billion in social security benefits and payments. That is £1.1 billion more than the level of funding that is forecast to be received from the UK Government through the social security block grant adjustments, helping low-income families and disabled people with their living costs.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Earlier this week, I visited Advice Direct Scotland, which is funded by the Scottish Government. According to its stats, more people from my constituency than from any other constituency in the country have contacted it for energy advice. I believe that its outreach work across the country, including in my constituency, has led to some of the increase. It will also be attending a session at 7 1/2 John Wood Street in Port Glasgow tomorrow.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is vital that people reach out for support when they need it? Does she also agree that, in energy-rich but fuel-poor Scotland, we see yet another damning indictment of Scotland’s place in the union?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I agree with Stuart McMillan’s assessment. It is deeply concerning that we see so many people still in poverty. That is why the First Minister made an announcement about the fuel insecurity fund very early on when he came into post. He recognised its importance within the limited powers that we have to try and tackle poverty. The vast majority of those powers lie with Westminster, which has walked away from supporting people with the cost of living, particularly those who are living in fuel poverty.

We will do everything that we can, which includes funding Advice Direct Scotland and others who provide such valuable advice to people at times of crisis.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

One thing that will not help with the cost of living crisis is slashing the affordable housing supply budget by more than a quarter in real terms in the coming year. Anti-poverty charities such as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation have used words such as “disappointing”, “brutal” and “baffling” to describe the decision. Surely access to affordable housing is the bedrock of dealing with cost of living pressures. When will the Government recognise that there is a housing emergency on its watch and take action—including by reviewing its budget decisions, which are exacerbating the cost of living crisis?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I would be more than happy to meet the member to discuss the matter—as would the Minister for Housing, I am sure—so that he can tell us in detail how we are supposed to deal with a 10 per cent cut to the Scottish Government’s capital budget while still increasing budgets, as he has demanded. Paul O’Kane is of course absolutely within his rights t

o come to the chamber and ask for more money. If he wants to get into a genuine discussion about how to help with housing and homelessness, my door is open—and the Minister for Housing’s door is open—so we can discuss where the money would come from, and get past the headlines and into the details.

Household Incomes (Rutherglen)

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

6. To ask the Scottish Government how its budget will support household incomes in the Rutherglen constituency. (S6O-02955)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

T

he heart of our budget is the social contract between the Scottish Government and the people of Scotland. People in Rutherglen will continue to benefit from our long-standing commitments to free prescriptions, free access to higher education and the game-changing Scottish child payment. The Scottish budget commits a record £6.3 billion in social security benefits and payments to deliver on our national mission to tackle inequality. It sets aside £144 million to support a council tax freeze for this year, protecting household incomes across the country.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

The Scottish Government’s budget ensures that a majority of people in Scotland pay less income tax than elsewhere in the United Kingdom. In the midst of a Westminster cost of living crisis, the budget will freeze council tax, as the cabinet secretary has said, and increase the Scottish child payment. It will also provide the most generous early learning and childcare package across the UK, saving families thousands of pounds each year. Does the minister agree that the UK Government must now step up to protect incomes, and that it should do so by tackling rising food prices, mortgage payments and energy prices?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I do agree with that. Our values-based budget prioritises what matters, supporting people through the cost of living crisis and investing in our front-line public services.

The oversight and regulation of mortgage lenders is a reserved matter. We have repeatedly called on the UK Government to increase support for those who are being most impacted by increasing inflation, interest rates and living costs. In June 2023, Scotland became the first nation in the UK to publish a plan to work towards ending the need for food banks. That includes a new £1.8 million programme to improve urgent access to cash in a crisis. We continue to repeat our calls on the UK Government to provide more targeted support for vulnerable consumers. That includes pressing for the urgent introduction of a social tariff mechanism as a much-needed safety net for priority energy consumers—which, unfortunately, the UK Government has so far chosen not to progress.

Alcohol and Drugs Policy (Budget)

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether its proposed budget spend increase of £0.1 million for alcohol and drugs policy, which is reportedly a real-terms reduction, is sufficient to address the challenges faced in this area. (S6O-02956)

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

The

2024-25 alcohol and drugs budget has remained the same as that for 2023-24. The minor change seen in the published 2024-25 budget is not a proposed budget spend increase; rather, it shows funding being formally baselined into the alcohol and drugs budget line. The £13.6 million budget increase from 2022-23 to 2023-24 includes an additional £12 million to deliver the cross-Government plan, which was published in January 2023. The remaining £1.6 million increase covers portfolio operating costs for drug and alcohol staff, the funding for which was previously held centrally. Funding for drugs policy has increased by 67 per cent in real terms from 2014-15 to 2023-24, according to Audit Scotland figures published in 2022.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

We need to get some reality here. The Scottish Government declared alcohol harm as a public health emergency in its 2022-23 budget. Since then, the number of people losing their lives to alcohol has tragically increased while, since 2016-17, the number of people with alcohol problems who are accessing treatment has fallen dramatically.

Is it time for the Scottish Government to stop tinkering on the edges and instead put forward a comprehensive strategy to ensure that fewer people experience problems caused by alcohol and that people get the support and treatment that they need when they need it?

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

I

thank Carol Mochan for that question, which gives me the opportunity to inform the Parliament that, in the coming weeks, we will have a debate in the chamber on alcohol harms and how the Scottish Government is seeking to address the matter. I look forward to having Carol Mochan and others participate in that debate with me.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes general questions.

Post Office Horizon Prosecutions

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. The Post Office scandal involving Horizon is a horrendous miscarriage of justice that has ruined hundreds of lives. Politicians of all parties will rightly reflect on what they should have done sooner. The United Kingdom Government has now acted to overturn the wrongful convictions of innocent victims. In Scotland, however, prosecutions were handled by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, not the Post Office. Has the First Minister established whether passing a legislative consent motion to the proposed UK law will be the fastest way to clear all victims here in Scotland? Will he confirm to Parliament how he will work with the UK Government to overturn those convictions as quickly as possible?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

First and foremost, I pay tribute to Alan Bates and the hundreds of other campaigners, sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses—[

Applause

.]—who have worked tirelessly over decades to ensure that they receive justice—justice that they are still waiting for. Of course, it should not have taken the showing of a television drama before action was taken.

Douglas Ross is right that there is a need for reflection on the part of all those involved. The Post Office is a wholly reserved institution that is accountable to UK Government ministers. As he rightly pointed out, the difference is that prosecutions in Scotland have been conducted by the independent Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. I spoke to the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General this morning. The Lord Advocate is willing to provide a briefing for any members of the Scottish Parliament who have an interest in the Crown Office’s handling of the issues.

To answer Douglas Ross’s question directly, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice has written to her counterpart in the UK Government to say that we are willing to work with it on the legislation that it is introducing to overturn wrongful convictions. The quickest way to do that would probably be through the legislative consent motion process, but there are a number of complexities to navigate, for the reasons that Douglas Ross has already highlighted. We will, of course, engage on that immediately and urgently, as we have already done with the UK Government. It is absolutely certain that, whether people who have been impacted and affected by the scandal are in Scotland or any other part of the United Kingdom, some have waited far too long for justice. They should not have to wait a moment longer.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I join the First Minister in congratulating Alan Bates and others, as I did in the House of Commons earlier this week. Victims and the public will rightly ask why it has taken so long for this deep injustice to be corrected. Multiple political parties and many individuals should have, and could have, acted sooner. Blame starts with the Post Office, but people are understandably examining what others could have done. Scotland’s Crown Office was made aware of concerns with the Horizon system in 2013—more than 10 years ago. This week, Dr Andrew Tickell, a senior law lecturer at Glasgow Caledonian University, said:

“The revelation that the Crown Office knew of problems is huge.”

He continued:

“Did they stop prosecuting? Did it occur to them that any of their cases before 2013 might now be unsafe because of these uncertainties?”

He added that Scotland was

“just at the beginning”

of addressing the miscarriages of justice, while cases in England and Wales—[

Interruption

.]—were

“much, much further down the road”.

I am just quoting a law professor. [

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Ross.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I simply ask the First Minister whether he agrees that the process in Scotland needs to be accelerated.

The First Minister

First and foremost, we must remember that a public inquiry is under way, but it has already been well established that the inaccurate data and evidence that was presented by the Post Office is at the very heart of the scandal. The Post Office is, and has been, accountable to UK Government ministers over many successive parliamentary terms. That will undoubtedly be a matter for interrogation and questioning at the public inquiry.

I reiterate that the Lord Advocate is willing to meet members of the Scottish Parliament to talk them through what the Crown Office has done here, because it involves the independent functions of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.

My understanding is that, in 2013, when Post Office solicitors told the Crown Office about the challenges around the Horizon evidence, it continued to have dialogue with the Post Office but, immediately, at the earliest possible point in time—September 2013—it provided guidance to every Scottish prosecutor to treat cases reported by the Post Office with regard to their individual facts and circumstances and evidence that did not rely on Horizon. It then spent the next couple of years—between 2013 and 2015—in continual dialogue with the Post Office to try to get further detail around the evidential basis.

To conclude, on the position post-2015 with regard to assurances that have been provided, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service issued instructions to all prosecutors in 2015 not to proceed with any Post Office case in which a sufficiency of evidence was dependent on evidence from the Horizon system. Therefore, no case was effectively prosecuted from 2015 in which the evidence was dependent on evidence from the Horizon system.

On where we are in relation to the process with the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission—

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, please, First Minister.

The First Minister

—

I am willing to work with the UK Government to look at a process that effectively seeks to overturn any wrongful convictions en masse.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The actions of the Post Office were despicable and probably criminal, but the actions of the Crown Office here in Scotland should trouble us greatly. There was a sudden spike in cases involving people who were among the most trusted in their communities, but the Crown Office proceeded anyway. That was until 2013. Suddenly, it decided not to proceed with a case in the Gorbals.

The First Minister has just articulated that it was in September 2013 when the Crown Office first found out and sent out that information, but it was not. We know that, on 29 January 2013, a procurator fiscal cited “issues with Horizon” as the reason for not proceeding with a case. That was in January 2013, not in September 2013. The convener of the Law Society of Scotland’s criminal law committee, Stuart Munro, said that the procurator fiscal should have gone public. He said:

“The Procurator Fiscal has a legal duty to disclose relevant information to those accused of crimes, and that duty continues even after a trial is concluded. As soon as the Fiscal became aware of concerns about the reliability of Horizon, that should have been disclosed.”

Does the First Minister agree that Scotland’s Crown Office has serious questions to answer?

The First Minister

I say genuinely and in sincerity to Douglas Ross that the real questions are for the Post Office and are about the information that it provided not just to the Crown Office but to Government ministers. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

That is why a public inquiry is so important. Anybody who has questions to answer should co-operate with that public inquiry. Let us not forget that the Post Office is a wholly reserved institution that is directly accountable to UK Government ministers.

There are legitimate questions to ask of the Crown Office, which, of course, operates independently of Government ministers and independently of me, as the First Minister, as it should. There are legitimate questions that individuals and members of the Scottish Parliament will have for the Crown Office. I repeat what the Lord Advocate told me this morning. She is more than happy to provide a briefing to members of the Scottish Parliament who have an interest in the matter.

I will end by reiterating the points that I made at the very beginning. Sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses have waited far too long for justice, and it is incumbent on all of us to ensure that we get them not just access to that justice but access to compensation.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The UK-wide inquiry that the First Minister has mentioned will look at all those issues, and it is right that it continues to scrutinise what happened. However, we must examine the unique circumstances in Scotland, where the Crown Office was responsible for prosecutions of innocent people. If the Crown Office knew of specific problems over a decade ago, that raises serious questions. We do not know what it did—if anything—with that information.

The Horizon Post Office scandal has devastated lives. It is the most appalling miscarriage of justice. Good people were criminalised because of an information technology failure that they had nothing to do with and a cover-up that lasted for years. It is right that no stone is left unturned in seeking answers. The Crown Office in Scotland must be transparent. Prosecutors were aware of issues with the flawed Horizon system more than 10 years ago. We do not need meetings or briefings from the Lord Advocate; we need her here in Parliament to answer questions about the scandal. Does the First Minister agree that the Lord Advocate should urgently come to this Parliament to answer questions?

The First Minister

I remind Douglas Ross—this is an important point—that, when the Lord Advocate discharges her functions as head of the prosecution service, she does so independently of me. When I spoke to the Lord Advocate this morning, she was more than happy to consider whether to provide a briefing, a ministerial statement or whatever was appropriate. I am certain that the Lord Advocate is listening to these exchanges, and it will, of course, be for her to determine, in her independent function as head of the prosecution service, how she should answer any of those questions.

Let me reiterate the point that, in September 2013, Scottish prosecutors were told to treat cases that were reported by the Post Office in regard to their facts and circumstances and using evidence that did not rely on Horizon—they should be reported in their individual regard. Then, from 2015, no cases were prosecuted where the sufficiency of evidence was dependent on the evidence from the Horizon system. My understanding, again from the conversations that I have had with the Lord Advocate, is that, in its engagement with the Post Office between 2013 and 2015, the Crown Office was assured by the Post Office and its legal representatives that issues that arose with the Horizon system in England did not impact on any live Scottish cases. The Crown Office continued to seek those assurances, as well as taking the action that it did in 2013 and 2015.

I simply end where I started. Time and again, sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses were telling the UK Government and ministers that the Post Office, for which the UK Government and ministers are wholly responsible, was lying; it was simply not telling the truth about the Horizon system. Time and again, the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses were not listened to. They have waited far too long for justice and far too long for compensation. The Scottish Government will work with the UK Government to ensure that they get access not just to justice but to the compensation that they so rightly deserve.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. The lives of potentially hundreds of Scottish sub-postmasters and their families were ruined by the Post Office and Fujitsu. People lost their livelihoods and, in some cases, even lost their lives. They have described being ostracised in their communities, their families shunned and their children targeted. It is a national disgrace. I welcome that the convictions will be overturned, but there is more to the scandal.

Unlike in England and Wales, where the Post Office itself brought the prosecutions, in Scotland they were carried out by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. As we have heard, ministers and the Crown were made aware of concerns about unsafe prosecutions in 2013. What conversations have the First Minister, his Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs and the Lord Advocate had about the role of Scottish institutions in prosecuting those cases and how that was allowed to happen for so long?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Again, l

et me be clear: whether as justice secretary at the time or in my current role as First Minister, it would be wholly inappropriate for any Government minister to demand to see the evidential basis for a case that the Crown was prosecuting. [

Interruption

.] I know that Anas Sarwar is not asking that, but I am making the point that, if the issue is the evidence that was provided by the Post Office, it would be wrong for me, in any ministerial position, to suggest that I need to see that evidential basis in any individual prosecution.

Anas Sarwar asked what conversations I have had with the Lord Advocate. Again, I had a conversation this morning with the Lord Advocate, when she stressed a number of points. She is happy to provide a timeline of how the Crown has responded and she is very confident about the Crown’s response. It was told in 2013 about possible problems, and it issued guidance to its individual prosecutors in 2013. After a period of continual conversation with the Post Office, in 2015, it stopped prosecuting cases where the sufficiency of evidence was dependent on the Horizon system.

The Lord Advocate is open to briefing members of the Scottish Parliament, as we have already heard, and I am sure that she will reflect on whether that is through a briefing or a ministerial statement.

Anas Sarwar is absolutely right that at the heart of this are hundreds of people right across the United Kingdom whose lives and reputations have been tarnished and ruined. It is incumbent on this Government that it works with any other Government in the United Kingdom, including the UK Government, to ensure that justice is forthcoming and that access to compensation is not impeded.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

There are big questions for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, and it would be right for the Lord Advocate to come to the Parliament to answer those questions from members. However, the matter goes beyond convictions.

Disturbing accounts from the public inquiry have revealed that Post Office employees were going door to door in Scotland to threaten and extort money from sub-postmasters. With behaviour that was reminiscent of the mob, those stories show that the Post Office behaved like a private police force and showed little regard for the law in Scotland. Sub-postmasters were pressured into accepting accusations of false accounting and were forced to hand over thousands of pounds that day or face imprisonment. If any other organisation had behaved like that in Scotland, we would expect to see criminal investigations into its conduct. Does the First Minister agree that potentially criminal behaviour by Post Office officials in Scotland should be properly investigated so that the scandal does not go unpunished?

The First Minister

I say to Anas Sarwar—I should have perhaps said this at the beginning of my response to Douglas Ross—that I absolutely empathise in the strongest way possible with the harrowing tales that we have heard from sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses up and down the country. My family members are sub-postmasters—my late grandfather was a sub-postmaster and my stepgran continues to be so, although they were not affected by this particular scandal. The big difference from the situation in England and Wales is that the Post Office does not have the ability to lodge private prosecutions in Scotland. It is absolutely right that the behaviours of the Post Office should be interrogated, which is why there is a public inquiry. If there were any behaviours in Scotland that were possibly criminal, it would not be for me to investigate them—rightly, the independent Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service would do so. I have every confidence that the Crown will look into any allegations that are made to it about any potential criminal behaviour.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Too often in this country, when there is an injustice, the first instinct of institutions and Government is to protect themselves. Whether it is sub-postmasters taking on the Post Office, the Hillsborough scandal, the Clostridioides difficile—C diff—scandal at the Vale of Leven hospital or victims at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, it should not take victims disclosing the most harrowing moments of their lives to shame both Scotland’s Governments into action, but it happens too often. The Government is meant to be on the people’s side, but, tragically, when victims come looking for justice, all they get are more barriers put in their way. The silence, denial and cover-up compounds the injustice and amplifies victims’ pain. Ministers—whether Scottish or UK Government ministers—always say that we must learn the lessons and that it cannot be allowed to happen again, but it does. Does the First Minister agree that the priority for Government should be truth and justice for victims, rather than protecting institutions or individual reputations?

The First Minister

I agree that that is of paramount importance. I remind Anas Sarwar that the Labour Party was in the UK Government for a number of years while sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses were telling UK Government postal ministers—Labour ministers—that the Post Office was presenting inaccurate data. It is important for all UK-based parties to reflect on their relationship with the Post Office and whether they were listening or not.

On the Government’s approach, we can demonstrate that, time and again, when issues have been brought to this Government, we have engaged—often in really difficult conversations—with individuals who bring forward harrowing stories and tales. Where necessary, we will always investigate, whether that is through independent commissioners, such as the patient safety commissioner—I am pleased that the Patient Safety Commissioner for Scotland Bill has been passed—through the duty of candour in relation to the national health service, or through the public inquiries that we instruct. The Government’s approach has been and will always be to ensure that we seek the truth and that we do right by the people of Scotland. When it comes to sub-postmasters in Scotland, we will work with whoever we need to, including the UK Government, to ensure that those individuals get access to not only justice, but the compensation that has been denied to them for far too long.

Cabinet (Meetings)

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

3. To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. (S6F-02695)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Tuesday.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

Nitazenes are a type of synthetic opioid that is 50 times stronger than heroin. They are often delivered in a single pill or disguised as other substances entirely.

The synthetic opioid epidemic has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives across North America and public health officials and charities are worried that those drugs are coming to Scotland. We know that nitazenes have been linked to the deaths of nine Scots since last summer.

The front line in our response to those new substances is made up of information, detection and treatment. We still have the worst rate of drug deaths in all of Europe, so why does the First Minister’s budget deliver a real-terms cut to drug services just as a new threat is emerging?

The First Minister

We are committed to, and have not reduced the money for, the national mission to deal with drugs deaths.

Alex Cole-Hamilton is absolutely right about the danger of

nitazenes. The drugs minister and I spoke about that threat recently and, when I was there last year, I spoke to the New York health commissioner about the real dangers of synthetic opioids. Alex Cole-Hamilton is right to say that there is a real epidemic in America and we are not complacent about the challenges that we face here.

We will continue to invest in the national mission to tackle drug deaths. We are taking a number of specific actions in relation to nitazenes and synthetic opioids. I am more than happy for the drugs minister to meet Alex-Cole Hamilton to give him more detail about the range of actions that we are taking in that regard.

Offshore Petroleum Licensing Bill (Climate Implications)

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is regarding any implications for its net zero ambitions of the United Kingdom Government’s Offshore Petroleum Licensing Bill, which seeks changes to the licensing regime, including how regularly licensing rounds are held. (S6F-02700)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing remain reserved to the UK Government. The Offshore Petroleum Licensing Bill, along with other recent announcements, demonstrates that the UK Government is not serious about the climate crisis. Instead of licensing ever more fossil fuel extraction, which the bill would have happen on an annual basis, the UK Government should be supporting a fair and just energy transition, in line with its climate commitments.

We have repeatedly called for a rigorous climate compatibility test to be applied to all new oil and gas developments. However, the checkpoint introduced by the UK Government before the latest licensing round is neither robust nor, frankly, transparent.

In Scotland, we remain absolutely committed to a just transition to net zero by 2045.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

The former UK energy minister Chris Skidmore recently resigned as a member of Parliament in protest at the bill, and Sir Alok Sharma MP, president of the

26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—has stated that the bill reinforces

“that unfortunate perception about the UK rowing back on climate action”.

Even those in the Tory party recognise that the UK Government is not serious about climate change.

Does the First Minister agree that a just transition to retrain and reskill the oil and gas workforce is vital to helping to deliver the energy that we use, that any party that forms the next UK Government must be serious about climate change and the push towards net zero, and that only as an independent nation will the people of Scotland get an energy policy that is fit for the future and for the emergency that we are facing?

The First Minister

I agree with that. The fact that the Prime Minister spent more time on his private jet getting there than he did at COP28 tells us his level of commitment to tackling the climate crisis. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

It is also true that 2023 has been confirmed as the hottest year on record. Those who refuse, in the face of all the evidence, to take the necessary actions are completely abdicating their responsibility not only to current generations but to future ones and to our planet.

I agree that responding to the climate emergency is an absolute imperative. There should be a political consensus on that, and I look forward to meeting with party leaders in the coming weeks to discuss how we can work collectively to tackle the climate crisis. It would be really helpful if, every time the Scottish Government proposed action to tackle the climate crisis, the Opposition did not oppose it simply for opposition’s sake.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The latest episode in Tory climate denial threatens to deepen our reliance on climate-wrecking fossil fuels exactly when we should be doubling down on cheap and clean renewables.

In Scotland, we are making great progress—there has been record investment in renewables as a result of planning reforms and there are tens of thousands of quality new green jobs. The “Draft Energy Strategy and Just Transition plan—delivering a fair and secure zero carbon energy system for Scotland” reflects both the scientific evidence of climate change and that economic opportunity by clearly stating a presumption against new oil and gas fields. What impact will the new bill have on that exact commitment?

The First Minister

T

he Scottish Government absolutely values the exceptional role that the oil and gas industry has played over many decades in Scotland, as well as the exceptional efforts of the incredibly hard-working workforce in the oil and gas industry, which is a vital, key component of Scotland’s economic success. However, regardless of what anybody says in the chamber, the facts are the facts. Given the decline of the North Sea basin and the exceptional potential of our renewable sources, it is not just in the planet’s interest—although, of course, it is—to have a just transition to net zero but in our economic interest to ensure that that potential is unleashed.

We are in the process of finalising the energy strategy and just transition plan in the light of the consultation responses that were received. Our focus will be on reducing emissions and the just transition away from fossil fuels and towards unleashing the potential of our net zero green technologies.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

As the Rosebank oilfield comes on stream and the Forties pipeline, which accounts for around 40 per cent of UK oil production, continues to flow, refining must be carried out at Grangemouth. Will the First Minister today commit to bringing together Unite the union, Petroineos and the UK Government to create the required rescue package to increase the profitability of the plant and secure its long-term future as a Scottish refinery?

The First Minister

The future industry board, which is looking at that issue, is meeting in the coming weeks. Neil Gray and I have had conversations with the owners of the Grangemouth refinery, and there will be continued and on-going discussions. All of us want to see a viable and sustainable future for Grangemouth, and—of course—we will do our best to ensure that there are no job losses at Grangemouth. We will do what we can. The future industry board will meet, and I will ensure that Neil Gray writes to Ash Regan with the full details of the actions that we are taking, which include engaging not just with the owners of Grangemouth but with trade union colleagues.

Care-experienced People

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

5. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reports that the Promise is not on track to deliver effective change for Scotland’s care-experienced people. (S6F-02708)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Keeping the Promise is an absolute top priority for this Government. When I met Fiona Duncan, the independent strategic adviser for the Promise, late last year, she confirmed her view that the Promise can be met by 2030. I am determined that we will do exactly that.

Over the past year, we have made substantial progress on a range of aspects of the Promise, including the Scottish recommended allowance for foster and kinship carers and the investment of £6 million in the bairns’ hoose pathfinders.

There is simply no doubt that there is more to do, but I assure the chamber that this Government will do everything in our power to keep and deliver the Promise to Scotland’s care-experienced people.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Four

years on, and the lives of care-experienced people in Scotland are no better. The First Minister will be aware of the comments by Megan Moffat of Who Cares? Scotland, who said that, despite laudable ambitions, there is

“no clear detail on how that should happen, who should do it, when by and how much it will cost”.

The outgoing children’s commissioner stated that Nicola Sturgeon “absolutely” failed Scotland’s young people, and that self-same MSP admitted recently that

“there is an implementation gap”.

When will the Scottish National Party-Green Government stop tinkering around the edges of meaningful change, empower and adequately fund our councils to do the job, get the Promise back on track and stop failing the most vulnerable people in our society?

The First Minister

It takes some brass neck for a Conservative member to stand there and demand more money for local services and local government when the Conservative Government is continually—time and again—cutting our budget in real terms over a number of years.

I also disagree fundamentally with Roz McCall’s suggestion that things have not improved. The latest published data shows that there were almost 2,000 fewer looked-after children in July 2022 than there were at the start of the Promise, in July 2020, which is a 12.9 per cent reduction. That is not just a number; that is almost 2,000 children, young people and families who have been impacted and affected positively.

I am not suggesting to Roz McCall or to anybody else that there are no issues with the implementation of the Promise. However, in my recent meeting with Fiona Duncan, who is widely respected by members across the chamber, there was a determination and understanding that we can absolutely keep the Promise. That is why we will work with Fiona Duncan and all the stakeholders in relation to keeping the Promise through plan 24-30. I promise those care-experienced young people and other care-experienced people, whatever stage of life they are at, that the Government is absolutely resolute and unwavering in its commitment to keeping and delivering the Promise to them.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

D

oes the First Minister agree that, if we are to keep the Promise, the significant progress that has already been made needs to continue and now intensify? In particular, does he agree that the whole family wellbeing fund is absolutely essential to providing the funding to transform services so that families are better supported and fewer young people need to enter care in the first place? To that end, will he give a commitment that the fund will be delivered in full and that it will be fully invested in to improve the lives of the young people—present and future—to whom the Promise has been made?

The First Minister

Absolutely. First and foremost, I recognise that there would not be a Promise if it were not for the efforts of the former First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, and she would be the first to say that there would be no Promise if it were not for the efforts of young care-experienced people. I pay tribute to them for the impact that they have had on us all—not just on those of us in Government, but, I suspect, on every member of the Scottish Parliament who has engaged with care-experienced young people and care-experienced people more generally.

I have had the pleasure of engaging with a number of care-experienced people in my time as First Minister and before. Most recently, I hosted them in Bute house for a Christmas party, which was not only great fun but gave me the opportunity to hear from them directly on the improvements that we have to make.

To answer Nicola Sturgeon’s question, the whole family wellbeing fund is a central component in keeping the Promise. Despite the very challenging autumn statement and the continued cuts to our budget over a number of years, we have prioritised £50 million for the fund in the 2024-25 budget. We have done so even in the face of significant financial constraints, which reflects the priority and importance that we attach to keeping the Promise.

Mental Health

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

6. To ask the First Minister what urgent steps are being taken to address reports of a mental health crisis with an increase in calls to the NHS 24 mental health hub. (S6F-02713)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

There is no question that, for many people, recent times have been extremely challenging, exacerbated by Covid and the cost of living crisis. We are committed to supporting people’s mental health and wellbeing, just as we are to supporting their physical health.

Our recently published mental health and wellbeing strategy delivery plan and workforce action plan recognise that an effective mental health system must address all levels of need. They set out what people have a right to expect from high-quality mental health services and the actions that we are taking to achieve those aims. Those actions will continue to evolve over time, and I am always open to constructive dialogue with Opposition parties on where they think that we can go further.

Paul Sweeney referenced NHS 24 call volumes. It is good that more people feel able to come forward and ask for help with their mental health, and our substantially increased investment in NHS 24 is helping to ensure that more calls can be responded to.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

D

ata from NHS 24 reveals that the number of calls regarding alcohol problems has risen by more than 600 in two years and that the number of calls regarding psychotic symptoms has more than doubled since 2021. Those calls are not simply from people who are presenting for the first time, but from people who are not being seen urgently in the way that they should.

Last year, astonishingly, more than 7,000 children and young people were turned away from child and adolescent mental health services, which is an average of 26 children a day. Primary and community care services are under growing pressure, but ministers have failed to start recruiting to the promised additional 1,000 mental health roles while cutting the budget for the coming year by £5 million after inflation is taken into account. Will the First Minister accept that his mental health strategy will fail unless it is properly resourced?

The First Minister

When it comes to mental health funding, the Government has a record that we are proud to stand on, and that is in the face of the most difficult set of financial circumstances and constrictions that we have had in the history of devolution.

The autumn statement from the United Kingdom Government was the worst-case scenario for Scotland. Difficult budget decisions have had to be made across Government, but that has not stopped us from focusing on our key priorities. Since 2020-21, the mental health directorate’s programme budget has more than doubled. When it comes to staffing, which Paul Sweeney mentioned, following our record-breaking investment in CAMHS, CAMHS staffing has more than doubled under this Government—it has gone up by more than 126 per cent since 2007.

Difficult decisions are being made right across the United Kingdom because of the cuts from the UK Government. Here is a quote from the budget for 2024-25 of—

The Presiding Officer

Thank you, First Minister.

The First Minister

—Labour-run Wales:

“we can no longer increase funding by £15m in 2024-25, as was originally planned. We have ... reduced the existing mental health ... budget by a further £6m”.

My point is that we will do everything that we can—

The Presiding Officer

Briefly, First Minister.

The First Minister

—

to increase investment in mental health, but we cannot do that in the face of continued cuts from the UK Government.

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

Research indicates that 10 per cent of children and young people have a clinically diagnosable mental health issue, which is about three children in every class. In particular, neurodivergent children and young people are struggling now, as Scotland faces a severe shortage of medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, which affects approximately 26,000 people. What can the Scottish Government do to address the issue?

The First Minister

Karen Adam raises a very important issue, which I know impacts a number of people across the country. I recognise the impact of the global medicine shortages on people living with ADHD and on their families.

The pricing and the supply of medicines are reserved matters for the UK Government, but we engage with it regularly, including specifically on this issue. The shortages have been caused by a combination of manufacturing issues and a global increase in demand, and Brexit red tape has certainly not helped. It is anticipated that most of the shortages of ADHD medicine will be resolved this month. NHS Scotland has robust systems in place to manage medicine shortages when they arise, and anyone who is affected should speak to their clinical team in the first instance.

The Presiding Officer

We move to general and constituency supplementary questions.

Matrix International (Jobs)

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Matrix International is one of Brechin’s biggest employers, but most of its employees are awaiting news of their jobs as the manufacturing firm considers its future. Storm Babet was blamed when the factory found itself under 4 feet of water, with extensive machine damage. What has the First Minister’s Government done to protect and preserve those highly skilled jobs in Brechin, and when will the Scottish National Party finally fulfil its promise to support the town in its time of greatest need?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I visited Brechin after storm Babet, and we have been able to dispense thousands of pounds in business recovery grants—I can provide Tess White with the exact details of that. We are stepping up to help the people and businesses of Brechin through the funding that we have made available. We were quick not just to visit but to act.

More broadly, the Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy and Scottish Enterprise are engaged on the issues relating to Matrix International. I was very disappointed to hear reports of potential job losses at Matrix International. The Scottish Government will provide support through our partnership action for continuing employment—PACE—initiative, whose members have already met company representatives to offer support to the workforce. Neil Gray will remain engaged on the issue, as will Scottish Enterprise. I am happy to write to Tess White with further details of that engagement.

Children and Young People with Additional Support Needs (Support)

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

During the stage 1 debate on my Disabled Children and Young People (Transitions to Adulthood) (Scotland) Bill, the Government argued that a change in the law was not needed because good practice on additional support needs was spreading. New data from the Government’s school census shows that the number of children with ASN who are getting legal support via a co-ordinated support plan has reached its lowest point ever. Despite the fact that the Government has promised action as far back as 2016, things are getting worse, not better, and a generation is being failed.

Given that the First Minister’s Government has made countless promises that things will get better, why is support for young people with additional support needs getting so much worse?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

We have invested significantly in ASN support for our young people. I say to Pam Duncan-Glancy that there are a number of reasons why the Government did not feel that it could support her bill, but we are always open to working with her or with any member across the chamber to see what further work we can do—what more we can do—to support our young people when it comes to the ASN support that they require.

As well as investing in that, we will continue to engage with our local authorities. The significant increase in their budgets that local authorities are getting in the 2024-25 budget that the Deputy First Minister presented to Parliament will, I hope, help in that regard.

XL Bully Dogs

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

L

ike many other members, I have been contacted by constituents about the Scottish Government’s position on the XL bully dog breed. In the light of the new controls on the breed in England and Wales, which will come into effect on 1 February, will the First Minister outline when his Government will reach a decision of its own on the issue?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I

t is probably worth saying, first and foremost, that what is happening in England and Wales cannot be described as a ban on XL bully dogs. Owners can still keep an XL bully dog, but they must make sure that it is registered on the exemption index and must fulfil the other criteria of the legislation.

When the UK Government’s action on XL bully dogs was first announced, which was done without any consultation with the Scottish Government or, as far as I can see, with animal welfare stakeholders, we committed to engaging with animal welfare stakeholders and, of course, to continuing to engage with the UK Government.

I am afraid that it has become clear in the past few weeks that we have seen a flow of XL bully dogs to Scotland as a result of a number of people bringing such dogs to the country. That being the case—we will give further details of this to members of the Scottish Parliament through a ministerial statement next week, if the Parliamentary Bureau agrees to that—we will, in essence, replicate the legislation that exists in England and Wales here in Scotland.

Ultimately, although we have a very good system of dog control notices and we take a deed-not-breed approach, we must respond to the situation as it currently stands. Therefore, we will do what we need to do to ensure public safety. Further detail will be given by the appropriate minister next week, subject to that being agreed by the Parliamentary Bureau.

A96 (Dualling)

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

New figures show that 11 people have died and 69 have been seriously injured in accidents on the A96 in the past four years. In 2011, the Scottish Government promised that the road would be dualled by 2030, but that is now subject to a review at a cost of £5 million, the publication of which has been delayed by more than a year. When will that review finally be published? Will the Government ever dual this killer road?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

What does not help when it comes to our capital infrastructure projects is a 10 per cent cut to our capital budget over the next five years. Conservative members cannot come to the chamber and demand that we continue to invest in roads while simultaneously cutting our budget time and time and time again. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

As we confirmed in our programme for government, we remain absolutely committed to improving the A96. That includes dualling the Inverness to Nairn section and the Nairn bypass, which already has ministerial consent, following the public local inquiry.

The Minister for Transport is due to meet members who have an interest in the A96 on 25 January. We will provide a more detailed update on the scheme, along with details of how the review of the wider A96 corridor is being undertaken. However, in the interim, I assure all members that preparation work continues at pace on the Inverness to Nairn section, including the Nairn bypass. I can advise the chamber that I expect that orders for the scheme will be made in the first quarter of 2024, with a view to completing the necessary statutory process.

Renfrewshire Council (Dargavel Schools)

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

The Accounts Commission is today discussing its report into Renfrewshire Council’s handling of the Dargavel schools debacle, which is estimated to cost Renfrewshire’s children and taxpayers up to £170 million. The commission has stated that the council faces a challenge to rebuild trust and confidence. It has also stated that the community will be dealing with the consequences of that error for some time. Given that, how can the First Minister have confidence in Renfrewshire Council, when so many local parents do not? Funding for a new Thorn primary school has been rejected by the Government, so what support will the Government provide to Renfrewshire’s children to stop them paying the price of their council’s incompetence?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Neil Bibby is right to raise—as he has been doing for a number of months—the serious concerns that parents in Renfrewshire have about that situation. The council will have to reflect very hard on how it will rebuild trust with parents in that regard.

The Scottish Government has a good record of investing in new schools and refurbishments across local authorities, including in Renfrewshire. Through the budget for 2024-25, which was announced by the Deputy First Minister, the Scottish Government will be giving a significant uplift to local government. We will continue to engage with local government and Renfrewshire Council on the issue, but it is the responsibility of Renfrewshire Council to ensure that it rebuilds trust with the parents and families affected.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s questions. There will be a short

suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and public gallery to do so before the next debate begins.

12:46 Meeting suspended.

12:47 On resuming—

Bank of Scotland Mobile Branch Services

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S5M-11518, in the name of Rhoda Grant, on the Bank of Scotland ending mobile branch services across Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament regrets the recently announced end of mobile branch services from the Bank of Scotland to several towns and villages across Scotland, including several in the Highlands and Islands region; understands that the end of these services will take effect in May 2024; further understands that, although the Bank of Scotland notes that there has been low use of its banking vans, some rural residents will be left without local banking services and will have to travel several miles to reach such services; believes that this will disproportionately affect elderly people and disabled people who potentially cannot travel or access mobile banking services, and notes the calls for the Bank of Scotland to reconsider these plans or implement alternative plans so that everyone can access suitable bank services easily.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The Bank of Scotland is ending mobile banking branches in 50 locations across Scotland, 13 of which are in the Highlands and Islands. Those mobile banks were a compromise when local branches were closed, and yet they, too, are closing.

In Caithness, there are only seven branches left of any bank at all. Since 2015, Caithness has seen a 72 per cent decline in branches. It is the same story elsewhere. In Moray, there has been a 66 per cent decline. In Ross, Skye and Lochaber, there has been a 65 per cent decline. In Inverness, Nairn and Badenoch and Strathspey, there has been a 50 per cent loss. Indeed, across the whole of Scotland, 60 per cent of branches have closed since 2015.

When branches were closing in rural areas, we warned that mobile banking vans were not an alternative, yet they were the compromise that was agreed at the time. Mobile banking branches are not great. They are in a village only for a short time, sometimes only for an hour at a time. That time is not always the right time for people who have to work, who have caring responsibilities or who are dependent on public transport. Who wants to queue for a mobile bank in the cold and wet, and in the winter? There is no disability access, and there is no privacy for anyone who is using those banks. It is no surprise, therefore, that they are used only by people who really cannot access banking facilities in any other way, and those people are now being abandoned by the banks.

Lairg is losing its Bank of Scotland mobile bank, and the nearest alternative branch is Golspie, which is 18 miles away—that is a 36-mile round trip. Lairg is often seen as a hub for the smaller communities surrounding it—places such as Kinlochbervie—and people from those communities will have even further to travel. In addition, if someone is trying to get to Golspie from Lairg by public transport, that is not easy; I believe that there are only three buses a day that run between the two places. That will be the case for many of the locations that are affected, and some will even have no public transport at all.

These are the banks that were bailed out during the banking crash by the people—the very people whom they are now abandoning—and yet they renege on their promises and pass the buck.

The banks say that there are alternatives. They suggest online banking, but in many remote and rural communities, there is no broadband, so people there cannot access online banking. Many people are uncomfortable with using online banking because they are not confident that the banks will deal with scams. Age UK estimates that 40 per cent of over-75s do not use the internet at all and so will not access internet banking. There are also people for whom doing things online is absolutely inaccessible. They include those who, for reasons to do with skills, disabilities and costs, cannot access online connectivity. The Digital Poverty Alliance, a group of charities that was formed to tackle digital exclusion, estimates that as many as 11 million people in the UK struggle with technology.

The banks also suggest using the post office, but access to the post office cannot be guaranteed. It is often very difficult to identify a business in a local community that will take on the post office role, and now, with the Horizon scandal, it will be even more difficult to identify people who would be willing to take on that role. It is poorly paid, and it is taken on only as a way of increasing footfall in an existing business.

The banks talk about LINK, PayPoint and cashback at local businesses. However, those very local businesses are dependent on the banks in order to have cash to be able to give cashback, and cash machines are even less likely to be available in those areas.

That has a huge impact on rural communities, and it makes doing business in rural areas more difficult. There is also a security risk—we hear that, as businesses become more cash based, they become a greater target for theft. There is anecdotal evidence that there are more break-ins in areas where banks have shut, as it means that people carry more cash because they cannot access money quickly.

We are all concerned about depopulation in rural areas. If these services are discontinued, it will make it harder to do business. That makes it harder for people to live in rural areas, which adds to depopulation.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

The member is making an excellent speech. In America, in the 1970s, it was recognised that banks would withdraw from the poorest and most rural communities in a practice known as redlining. At the time, the Carter Administration introduced the Community Reinvestment Act, which enabled banks to be forced to pay into supporting community co-operatives and community banking services. Does the member feel that similar provision is needed in this country

to ensure that we maintain the footprint of banking services across the country?

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

Yes—that is something that has to be explored, because people need access to banking services, and they should not be left to flounder in the way that they currently are.

I know that the Financial Conduct Authority has been given greater powers to protect access to cash in the United Kingdom. I also understand that the Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy is to meet with the FCA to explore ways in which we could tackle the issue, and I hope that, in summing up, he will update us on what is possible in that regard.

I would also be interested if the minister, in summing up, would tell us what interaction he has had with the bank and whether it is looking to change its mind or have a change of heart on the issue, because it is so important. Withdrawal of the services is simply unacceptable. Rather than cutting them, the bank should be looking at ways of serving its customers better.

The Bank of Scotland plans to withdraw the mobile banks by May this year. I urge it and Lloyds Banking Group to think seriously about whether that is really the way to serve their customers. I urge them to cancel the closures and reinstate local banking in our communities.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I

congratulate Rhoda Grant on securing this debate. I will be brief in my remarks.

I support Rhoda Grant’s motion and completely agree with her that mobile banking services are highly important. She highlighted very well the issues that are faced in remote and rural areas. The Bank of Scotland’s decision to remove mobile banking services will leave many people in some of our most remote and rural communities, including across Dumfries and Galloway in my South Scotland region, without direct access to banking. It is also clear that the decision will disproportionately affect elderly people and disabled people. I join Rhoda Grant and others in calling on the Bank of Scotland to revisit the decision and ensure that people in rural areas are not penalised.

I have been contacted by many constituents who are extremely concerned about the withdrawal of the Bank of Scotland services across Dumfries and Galloway, including the mobile branch services. Constituents report that they feel that it is a betrayal of the promise that the Bank of Scotland made when it previously closed branches, citing that mobile services would be made available. The withdrawal of the services will leave many older and vulnerable people, including those who do not and cannot use online banking, without access to services.

Mobile branches were introduced in many areas that faced the closure of traditional bank branches, and they visit many communities fortnightly. The Bank of Scotland says that most people use the service to pay cash in or out. That shows that the mobile branches are incredibly important. The services are vital for communities that have already suffered many closures. We are seeing that in towns across Dumfries and Galloway.

Connectivity remains a major issue for many people who live in rural and remote parts of Dumfries and Galloway. For example, if a constituent in Wigtown or Whithorn is forced to travel to Newton Stewart in order to bank, it is a one-hour round trip. If they do not have a car, it is a three-hour round trip, given the infrequency of local buses.

The banks must treat people in rural areas with equity and, above all, respect. As I indicated, mobile branches were already a compromise, and there are issues to do with their accessibility. Rhoda Grant highlighted that. For example, my mum couldnae manage the steps on to the mobile service and she was told to bank on the pavement. When she told me that, I found it unbelievable.

I have written to the Bank of Scotland’s public affairs department with my constituents’ concerns, and I have requested an urgent meeting to discuss how the bank will support people from rural areas to access lifeline banking services.

In closing—I said that my remarks would be brief—I support Rhoda Grant’s motion and I call on the Bank of Scotland to revisit the decision.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I commend Rhoda Grant for lodging her motion and congratulate her on securing the debate. She outlined her constituents’ concerns and, like her, I have constituents across my region who have concerns about the withdrawal of mobile banking.

Over the years, I have been involved in supporting a number of campaigns to try to save bank branches in different parts of my region. I well remember standing in the square in Aberfeldy on a very cold day a number of years ago with a large group of people from the local community who were trying to ensure that the last bank branch there remained open. Unfortunately, it did not. At the time, the sweetener was a promise—Emma Harper made this point, too—that, if the physical bank branch closed, a mobile bank would be provided as an alternative. It is very concerning that, just a few years on, that alternative is being withdrawn.

The issue affects a wide range of communities across Mid Scotland and Fife. The list of communities across Perthshire that are currently visited by the Bank of Scotland mobile branch includes Aberfeldy, Bankfoot, Errol, Scone, Methven, Dunning, Blair Atholl, Auchterarder, Luncarty, Coupar Angus, Murthly, Stanley, Kinross and Killin. A huge chunk of the population in the area that I represent will be affected.

I have called on Bank of Scotland to rethink that. It has said that it is looking to use community bankers as an alternative at three local sites—Aberfeldy, Auchterarder and Kinross. We await more details about how that will operate in practice, but I am not convinced that it will be a satisfactory alternative.

The wider context is that there have been changes in banking practices. That is understood. A lot of the bank branches that ended up being closed had very low footfall as people moved to banking online—as many of us have done. However, banking online is not for everyone, as Rhoda Grant has fairly said. Some people are physically unable to bank online because of particular disabilities, and others, for various reasons, do not trust the internet or do not have access to the internet because of the quality of their local broadband. Others—perhaps because they are elderly—are vulnerable and just do not have the capability to bank online. There are also small businesses that still deal in cash and that want to have somewhere to physically bank their cash, which they are unable to do online.

It has been suggested by the banks that close their branches that post offices should be used as an alternative. However, as has already been pointed out, post offices, too, are disappearing in many of our towns and villages. In Aberfeldy, which I referred to, there is currently an issue about the future of the post office, because the owner wants to relocate it from its current premises to other premises that he owns in the town, and it is not clear whether permission for that will be forthcoming from the Post Office. There is therefore a concern over whether that facility might also be lost.

The key point is that there has to be access to comprehensive banking services for all sections of society, including those who struggle to use online banking. If banks are to withdraw the services that currently exist—whether in physical branches or through mobile banking—they need to make sure that an appropriate alternative is in place for their customers. I appeal to them to do that. At the very least, they need to rethink the withdrawal of mobile banking.

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I thank Rhoda Grant for bringing the debate to the chamber. As she and others have said, when branches started to close, we were all promised that the last branch would be kept open; when the last branch closed, we were all told that there would be at least a mobile branch; and now, for bank users in Fortrose, Kingussie and Beauly, even that is going. This year, on 13 May, the mobile branch will no longer frequent Fortrose; on 28 May, Kingussie will be without banking facilities; and, on 29 May, Beauly will also be left in the lurch.

Often, in such rural areas, the distance to the next automated teller machine or banking facility is huge. Who remembers the threat about five years ago to close the branch on Barra, with the local users being told that the closest ATM was about 15 miles away—ignoring the fact that it was on the other side of the water?

Cash still matters. It is always going to matter. The key fact is that it matters more to those who are least able to travel to the new banking sites. That includes small businesses that are trading hard to stay afloat. They have no time to travel for up to an hour to get to their closest bank to deposit cash.

It is the same for families and households, for whom every penny matters in order to make ends meet. It has been well documented that those who are most affected by poverty and those who deal the most with fragile finances will be left behind by these decisions.

Last week, as I queued in a supermarket, which shall remain nameless, to use an automated checkout, I was struck that one of those was free but was card only and, of the six people waiting, I was the only one who could use it.

I join others in appealing to the banks to think again. We have in front us the figures, provided by the banking companies, about how usage is declining. However, I totally agree with Rhoda Grant that, so often, that is because they are open for only an hour or at inconvenient times—in other words, they are open to suit the banks and not the users. It is therefore no wonder when footfall declines because of that very reason.

Given that I have stood where the cabinet secretary is right now, tearing my hair out, it is important to say that there is a challenge for the Scottish Government, recognising that banking is completely reserved in relation to accountability and enforcement.

That is illustrated by an example in Aviemore, where there are plans for a banking hub to fill the gap that has been left by the closures of the RBS and Bank of Scotland branches. The town has been classified as not rural enough to secure the support and authority to go ahead with a banking hub, but that hub is essential. Although there is a post office, anyone who knows Aviemore will know how popular it is among tourists. Particularly during big events, the post office sometimes has to take deposits or provide cash in the region of thousands of pounds.

LINK and Cash Access UK have assessed Aviemore. I met them just before Christmas and, although they were very helpful, they concluded that, according to their rules, they could not classify Aviemore as being able to open a banking hub. It might be worth reminding members that the nearest bank is therefore in Inverness, which is at least 45 minutes’ drive away, with limited public transport.

The Financial Conduct Authority is currently consulting on the rules surrounding rurality and where communities can establish banking hubs. That consultation closes in February. My one ask in the debate is, in essence, an open invitation to everyone to respond to that consultation. I would also be grateful if the cabinet secretary could ensure that the Scottish Government responds to the consultation to appeal for further discretion in order to truly take into account the rurality and distances that many of our Highlands and Islands communities are grappling with. It is about ensuring that, where a community wants and comes together to open a banking hub—which, by the way, is not just a replacement for branches, but usually a replacement for the last branch, and now a replacement for the closure of banking hubs—the rules allow for that, rather than standing in the way.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I thank Rhoda Grant for bringing this important motion to Parliament.

Let us be absolutely clear: mobile bank branches were introduced into rural Scotland as a sop to cover up a deeply unpopular and widely opposed bank branch closure programme. According to the consumer organisation Which?, the Lloyds Banking Group, the owners of the Bank of Scotland, who are behind these proposals, has shut down over 1,000 local branches since 2015, 1,144 of which were Bank of Scotland branches. Another 16 Bank of Scotland branches are scheduled to close in 2024. So this latest sting, to withdraw these mobile banking services the length and breadth of rural Scotland, is nothing less than a double-cross—it is a con trick.

It is the job of this Parliament to remind the people who we are talking about today, so let us be absolutely clear on that, too. In the banking crisis, £137 billion of public money—of our money; of the people’s money—was injected in the form of loans and capital to stabilise the financial system, to support the banks, including HBOS, and to bail out their shareholders. On top of that, £1 trillion of public money—of our money; of the people’s money—was put up to provide shareholder guarantees. And on top of that, the UK Government bought shares—over 40 per cent of the shares—in HBOS and Lloyds TSB to recapitalise the bank and so rescue it from total collapse. That is who we are talking about today.

On top of that, as the National Audit Office has reported, even when those shares were sold back, brokered by Morgan Stanley, it was at a catastrophic loss to the public purse of between £3 billion and £6 billion. So these banks owe us in every sense, and that is why it is right that, today, this Parliament of elected representatives calls out the unelected bankers, bosses and bureaucrats who were responsible then and who are responsible now.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

My friend is making a very powerful speech. In relation to his point about the main banks in the UK, does he note that the five main clearing banks in Britain account for 85 per cent of all current accounts whereas, in contrast, in Germany, there are 400 Sparkasse banks and more than 1,000 co-operative banks? Even if the powers of financial regulation are reserved, there is clearly an opportunity for us to further diversify the financial footprint in Scotland for the development of credit unions and other such co-operative organisations in Scotland.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Yes—I am greatly in favour of much more diverse ownership of the banking sector, as well as of the economy. That may take the form of co-operatives, mutuals and regional and publicly owned institutions as part of the tapestry of that.

However, let us deal with the situation as we find it. To the Lloyds Banking Group and its chair, Sir Robin Budenberg, one of the instigators who contrived the bank bailout scheme in 2008; to his deputy, Alan Dickinson, the chief executive officer of RBS UK when that bank collapsed and had to be nationalised; to Lord Lupton, the deputy chair of Baring Brothers bank when it collapsed, and a former Conservative Party treasurer; and to the rest of the executive and non-executive directors who are behind this shameful proposal, we say: search your conscience, do the right thing, do not come down with selective amnesia, do not abandon our oldest neighbours, do not cut off rural Scotland, and do not desert our most vulnerable and our very poorest citizens.

Let me finish with the words of Jean-Paul Marat, which echo down the centuries:

“Do not be taken in when they paternally pat you on the shoulder and say there’s no inequality worth speaking of and no more reason to fight, because if you believe them they will be completely in charge in their marble homes and granite banks from which they rob the people”.

The people are not taken in. They are not going to be patted and patronised. They will not be robbed. They know there is a reason to fight this rigged economy, and fight it they will. I hope that, as they do that, they will get the full and unconditional backing of this Parliament.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

First, I thank my Highlands and Islands colleague Rhoda Grant

for securing this important debate on an issue that is having an impact right across our region, including in Fortrose, Beauly and Kingussie, as Kate Forbes mentioned and as I have highlighted in the past. There has also been an impact in Moray, and I know that my colleague Douglas Ross has secured a meeting with the banks to discuss the lack of and reduction in services there.

The debate highlights a worrying trend of vital services across a number of sectors being downgraded or withdrawn entirely from our rural communities. I remember, when I was a pupil at Orphir primary school in Orkney, how the bank van used to come round to the parish. In visiting the school, it distributed its largesse of branded piggy banks to excited schoolchildren. That was not without ulterior motives, of course, as we were encouraged to sign up and deposit our hard-earned pocket money into a Super Squirrel saver or some such account. That reflects a time, however, when banks were very much part of our communities, working to bring services locally and to deliver the best services for their customers.

How times have changed. I was part of the Parliament’s Economy, Jobs and Fair Work Committee, which looked into bank closures across Scotland in 2018. In the same year, I spoke in a members’ business debate that was secured by my former colleague Dean Lockhart, which focused on the removal of cash machines across Scotland, including many in rural areas.

More and more banking services have been removed from our local communities, with constituents being forced to move to the last bank in town. As Kate Forbes highlighted, though, that bank later goes as well. In the committee’s 2018 report on bank branch closures, we recognised the role of mobile banking, although not as a direct replacement for local branches. However, we also highlighted that

“most people did not seem to know exactly what services the alternatives to bank branches offer (such as post office, mobile banking vans), indicating perhaps a lack of adequate communication from banks in this regard.”

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I

have a similar motion in the system, for a debate raising the plight of customers of bank branches that have closed in my region, for example in Arran and Cumbrae. I thank members who have signed that motion. I encourage others to do so, so that we can continue the debate.

On the member’s point about communication, I add that the response to my communications with many of the retail banks has been completely insufficient. The notice given to members and the wider public has been extremely poor, and the justification and rationale provided have been completely lacking. Does Jamie Halcro Johnston agree that more needs to be done to ensure that all retail banks hold not only to their legislative and regulatory commitments but to their social and moral obligations to their communities?

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I absolutely agree with Jamie Greene. One of my concerns is how the banks came to such decisions. Did they adequately promote the services that were available? If banks were to be honest, would they prefer to have fewer branches and have everyone banking via computers and smartphones? I recognise those concerns. Therefore, when banks argue that mobile services are not being used, I ask how those services have been advertised to bank customers and local communities, and how they have engaged with them to ensure that the timings and locations of the visits are what the communities need.

Who is being impacted most by the withdrawal of mobile banking services? As other members have done, I suggest that it is largely people who already have limited ability to access increasingly distant physical branches and also the many who find it difficult to use online banking, because of either the technical issues that members have highlighted or the fact that broadband can be so unreliable, as it is in parts of my region.

What happens when there is a problem with online banking, which is a situation of which I have personal experience? Despite my spending hours on the phone and online, my problem was solved only with a visit to an actual branch. Even with mobile banking vans, face-to-face engagement can often be key to solving issues or at least providing some reassurance for customers that their issue is being dealt with. For many, that possibility will now be lost.

There are, of course, other options. My parents have recently started using the pop-up post office in our parish, where limited banking services are available. However, that just highlights another issue that has already been raised in the debate. It is all very well for banks and others to suggest that services can be accessed at the post office, but it seems that, every week, we are losing local post office services across Scotland, often in some of our most remote and rural areas.

As I have said, such closures reflect a worrying trend that has seen a downgrading and removal of important rural services, which risks driving people away from our remote and rural communities. Although I know that times are changing, they cannot change so fast that communities, and in particular their most vulnerable people, are left behind.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

I thank Rhoda Grant for securing this important debate and for highlighting the issue.

I echo calls from members across the chamber for the Bank of Scotland to reconsider its decision. Communities across rural Scotland will feel its impact disproportionately. Although my Shetland constituents will not be directly affected by the bank’s announcement, the decision contributes to the ever-growing narrative that because the population of our rural and island areas is decreasing, services can be cut under that guise. It is precisely those communities that most rely on such services so, when they are gone, the impact is deeply felt. We have seen the closure of local bank branches due to the decline in footfall and the increase in internet banking. Mobile banking was introduced decades ago, in recognition of the fact that people in rural and island areas could not easily access physical banks in towns and cities.

We now see a decline in the use of the mobile service, with fewer mobile services being provided compared with those from branches. Perhaps timings on the mobile route are inconvenient, as others have suggested, and perhaps online banking has become the default way for many to manage their personal finances. However, cutting the mobile banking service will leave those who do not or cannot bank online with more costly and time-consuming trips to do their banking.

I thank Age Scotland for highlighting its findings from the big survey 2023, which received more than 4,000 responses from over-50s in Scotland. A third of older people do not use the internet for banking, and only 29 per cent of over-65s said that they do so.

Internet connectivity remains an issue for many communities; it is not as reliable for some as it is for their counterparts in other parts of the country.

The big survey also revealed that 37 per cent of Shetland respondents did not use the internet for banking.

We know that there is greater reassurance in having an in-person service for those who are worried about scams or for people to feel more confident in dealing with personal finances. Scotland-wide, 43 per cent of older people who responded to the big survey 2023 had been targeted by a scam, and 39 per cent stated that the scam was something to do with accessing banking details or financial services.

Compared with the rest of the United Kingdom, Scotland has a high rate of people who mainly use face-to-face banking services. The figure is 34 per cent, compared with a UK average of 27 per cent.

Why should those who do not bank online be impacted in this way? My Liberal Democrat MP colleague Jamie Stone has been vocal about the announced cuts to services in the far north of Scotland, and has highlighted the impact on remote communities and older people. He said:

“It’s only a few years ago that the UK Government stepped in to pay out the banks. I feel that this development goes against any notion of public service, especially for the elderly and those living in the remotest areas.”

I could not agree more. Accessing a bank is a basic necessity. It should not be merely a case of putting profit before service.

It seems to me that it is always the most vulnerable and those who live on the peripheries whose service are the first to get the chop, yet the impact is significant. Greater investment in service provision needs to be focused in rural and island areas to improve connectivity, whether digitally or through improved transport links.

To conclude, communities can survive only where viable services exist to support them. If we continue with the narrative that a decreased population is ripe for service cuts, we will reap what we sow, and the vicious cycle and downward spiral will continue.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

It is a pleasure to follow Beatrice Wishart. I agree with her. She was absolutely right to raise the issue of the rising tide of scams in this country. I also agree with Kate Forbes, who talked about the need for the regulatory framework to be revisited and for the realities of the geography of our part of the world to be a greater consideration of the FCA and, indeed, the banks.

I congratulate Rhoda Grant on bringing the debate to the chamber. It is vitally important that the issue keeps coming back to the chamber.

I want to mention one specific aspect of the debate in my remarks: the freedom to access and use cash. In my view, that is an essential right that people have in relation to how they manage their financial affairs. A preference to use cash does not make a person a dinosaur, and it is not only about being unable or unwilling to use technology; it is also about financial dignity and choice. It is about the fundamental right that we all have to choose how we deal with our financial affairs. I believe that we have a duty to conserve the right to access and use cash, that that right is under threat, and that the service reductions are undermining it.

The reality is that people who are as far removed geographically from banking facilities as many of our constituents are having their choices curtailed. They are being punished by geography. They are being severely disadvantaged because they live in a rural area or in one of Scotland’s many bank branch-free towns. Things are simply going to get much worse.

Richard Leonard will have to stay in his seat at this point, because I agree with what he said about the events of 2008. Many banks—the Royal Bank of Scotland and the Bank of Scotland—were bailed out by the taxpayer because of their incompetence, ineptitude and greed. Slowly but surely, those very banks are doing away with their branch networks.

That debt of obligation to the taxpayer has been conveniently shelved and forgotten—but not by the taxpayers. Rather than remembering that they owe the public a debt of gratitude for keeping their institutions alive when they nearly wrecked our economy, the banks across Scotland are slapping communities in the face by removing local access to cash.

It is right to recognise that it is cheaper for banks to operate digitally rather than physically. It is also correct to acknowledge that more people than ever before are using digital banking services. That said, those facts do not mean that digital banking is universal, or even that it should be universal. Rhoda Grant made an excellent point about connectivity, which is another issue that we should continue to debate and highlight in this Parliament. The removal of the physical banking infrastructure is leaving behind people who are not skilled in technology or who have no desire to become digitally engaged. It is also reducing the choice that people have over their own money.

Some people enjoy using cash. There are people of my generation and older who feel that tangible cash in the form of banknotes in their wallets or purses somehow gives them an additional level of financial freedom and security. The fact is that cash can be exchanged independently of the digital infrastructure, which is viewed by some people with suspicion and distrust, with regard to both cybersecurity and privacy. It is the right of the citizen to use cash.

Preserving the accessibility of cash is not about resisting progress but safeguarding inclusiveness and autonomy in personal financial management. Cash signifies freedom of choice and is a lifeline for certain demographics and for activities that are not best suited to digitisation.

Banks benefited from public support in their time of crisis, and yet their withdrawal of physical banking infringes upon the very communities that supported them when they needed the public purse to bail them out. Although digital banking offers efficiency, it cannot replace the versatility and dignity that cash grants to individuals. Upholding access to cash defends the rights of those who are less adept with technology and upholds the fundamental freedom of choice that we should all enjoy in relation to our financial matters.

Let us not forsake the accessibility of cash for expediency but strive for financial dignity through the choice of cash for all the people of Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Neil Gray to respond to the debate.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

B

efore I take the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Scottish Government, I thank Rhoda Grant for lodging today’s important motion and members for contributing to an excellent discussion. There have been brilliant speeches from Emma Harper, Murdo Fraser, Kate Forbes, Richard Leonard, Jamie Halcro Johnston, Beatrice Wishart and Stephen Kerr, which have contributed to building a consensus through the Parliament on the importance of banks to local communities and on the social responsibility that banks have to those communities.

The Scottish Government is acutely aware of the frustration and concerns that are felt by many about the overall decline in in-person banking services across Scotland, which have now been exacerbated by the Bank of Scotland’s recent decision to withdraw its mobile banking branch services, which as Rhoda Grant described, were supposed to be a compromise. Murdo Fraser made that point, too.

I assure Rhoda Grant that the Government shares those concerns—as I do, not least because, as someone who grew up in Orkney, I understand the impact that that decision will have on the most vulnerable individuals in our rural and island communities, who might struggle to access alternative services.

Rhoda Grant gave the example of the 36-mile round trip from Lairg to Golspie to access services. It is an area that I know well, so I understand the challenges that she articulated. That example and the example of the three-hour round trip that Emma Harper gave and, even worse, Kate Forbes’s example of having to cross the water to access banking services, demonstrate a lack of consideration by banking institutions of individual needs, the geographical issues that people in remote, rural and island communities face and the impact of those closures.

The discussion that we have had today is essential because Lloyds Banking Group’s decision to withdraw services has not been made in isolation. It continues a trend that has been witnessed across the banking sector in recent years. Since 2015, more than 60 per cent of Scottish bank branches have closed and, since 2018, more than 20 per cent of Scottish ATMs have closed. Those numbers are consistent with those in other regions in the UK, and it would be naive to assume that no more closures will follow.

That is of great concern to the Scottish Government, as we believe that the ability to access cash is essential in our society and that in-person banking still plays an important role in our communities, not least because of the points that Rhoda Grant made about concerns for people with digital literacy challenges and for businesses, which need to be able to bank. I have raised those issues with Lloyds Banking Group, and I will go into more detail about that shortly.

As Kate Forbes set out, the closures have a clear social impact, because those who are most likely to be affected are those who are most likely to be in poverty. Our concerns are not solely about having access to cash and services, as Emma Harper said. The point has not been raised thus far in the debate, but bank branches are often seen as anchors in our smaller communities. That is something that I recognise from the closures in my constituency or in towns such as Kirkwall, where we have seen branches close. Their closure will have wider impacts on the dynamics of our town centres and high streets, particularly when it is the last bank in town.

Despite our concerns, the Scottish Government’s regulatory power to act—as Kate Forbes said, although I suggest that she has more hair to pull out than I do, sadly—is extremely limited, because financial services are wholly reserved to the UK Government. I was therefore pleased to hear Stephen Kerr make the point that not only is it important for us to debate the issue despite it being reserved, but it is critically important that there is change at the UK Government and FCA level.

The UK Parliament recently legislated in this space by passing the Financial Services and Markets Act 2020 . We are encouraged by the access to cash provisions that are contained in the act. Most notably, the act gives the Financial Conduct Authority, which is the regulator of financial services in the UK, greater powers to protect access to cash by ensuring the provision of cash deposit and withdrawal services for personal and business current accounts across the UK.

Kate Forbes pointed out that the FCA has launched a consultation, and I also encourage colleagues to engage with it. The Scottish Government will certainly engage with the FCA in the coming period. I will meet the chief executive, Nikhil Rathi, next week to discuss the issue. This debate is incredibly timely, because I will be able to raise the concerns that have been well expressed today directly with the FCA to explore what can be done to ensure that the unique banking and cash access needs of Scotland’s communities, people, small businesses and charities are being considered.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I hope that the corporate comms and Government relations people of our big banks are watching the debate and squirming in their offices, because the cross-party consensus is powerful. The regulation of the industry is a reserved matter, and I know that the debate has been had in Westminster and that MPs from all political parties will say the same thing. In his meetings with the FCA or in any conversations that he might have with the UK Government, can the minister press the importance of not just the removal of physical banking but the fact that, when banks take away the last opportunity for banking—mobile banking, which is the substance of the debate—and squander their obligation to communities, they will lose their trust and possibly even their business as a result.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I have met Jamie Greene previously, because he has raised some of the concerns with me directly, and I have been able to use them in my interactions with Lloyds Banking Group. I can give him and other colleagues the assurance that I have made those very points. I met Lloyds Banking Group in November to discuss a range of topics, including branch closures, and to express to it my concerns and those of fellow MSPs with whom I have spoken.

Lloyds Banking Group has said to me that it has proactively sought to engage with Government when announcing closures, and it has provided assurances that, before it decided to withdraw the Bank of Scotland mobile branch service, thorough assessments were conducted across every impacted location to ensure that suitable alternatives were available for its customers.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

If Richard Leonard will hold on, I will come back to him.

I note the intervention that Jamie Greene made about prior consultation and information for constituency and regional members. I encourage the banks to ensure that there is early discussion with representatives and communities. The earlier that information is available, the better able communities are to bring about a banking hub or alternative options.

Do we have time for an intervention, Presiding Officer?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Leonard can make a brief intervention.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

The cabinet secretary uses the word “assessment”, which is the one that I have seen Lloyds Banking Group use. If there had been a genuine assessment, would that not mean that some of the mobile branches would stay, as well as some perhaps going, whereas the whole fleet is being taken out?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I share Richard Leonard’s scepticism about that, and I have expressed it directly in the conversations that I have had with Lloyds Banking Group.

As Murdo Fraser and others outlined, the number of alternative options for people and businesses to bank are limited. They are not like-for-like or an improvement; they are a derogation of service. They might mean that it is not possible to access advice and, in some cases, the post office might be closing as well.

Although the Scottish Government welcomes the engagement that we have had and is encouraged by some of the support that has been offered by Lloyds Banking Group, the debate demonstrates that the substitutes or alternatives are less than ideal and often short term. It also provides an opportunity for colleagues to explore what more can be done collectively across the industry and Government to ensure that individuals and businesses can access the banking services that they require.

In our conversations with it, the sector has expressed a willingness to continue engagement with Governments on branch closures and an openness to hearing from elected representatives about specific concerns from their constituents. There is an opportunity for better collaboration across all parties so that we can have constructive conversations with the sector and work together to understand the impact of closures and better support the banking needs of individuals and businesses across Scotland.

Therefore, we are working to set up a cross-party round table with the sector. We already have agreement from Scottish Financial Enterprise, Lloyds Banking Group and the FCA to convene that. We will look to invite colleagues from all parties to participate and take forward the points that have been raised here today.

I extend my thanks again to all members for contributing to this important debate and congratulate Rhoda Grant again on bringing the motion to the chamber. I look forward to continuing to work closely with colleagues across Parliament to ensure that the banking sector’s rapid transition to digitised services leaves nobody behind and that Scottish communities, businesses and individuals can continue to access the critical financial and banking services that they require.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the debate.

13:38 Meeting suspended.

14:30 On resuming—

Education and Skills

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

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

Education Maintenance Allowance (Uptake)

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what measures it is taking to encourage the uptake of education maintenance allowance among eligible pupils. (S6O-02942)

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

The e

ducation maintenance allowance

is vital in supporting young people from lower income households to overcome financial barriers and stay in education. It is a central component of the Government’s support for young people from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Promotion and awareness raising of the programme locally remains the responsibility of our delivery partners, which are local authorities, the Scottish Funding Council and learning centres, such as colleges and schools, as set out in the annual guidance. However, the Scottish Government continues to work closely with those delivery partners in order to ensure that effective promotion is maintained. I would encourage every young person who is eligible to apply so that they can receive that vital support.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

School attendance can be a huge challenge for pupils with additional support needs. Flexibility is key, with many young people requiring reduced timetables to best meet their educational needs.

Recently, I heard that some of those pupils have been told that they are not eligible for the education maintenance allowance. That seems unfair. A part-time timetable is a reasonable adjustment to meet an identified support need. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that pupils with additional support needs are encouraged to remain in education without compromising access to critical financial support? Is accurate data on part-time timetables routinely available?

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

I thank Stephanie Callaghan for raising that important issue. I share her concerns if young people with additional support needs are finding themselves in that position, which is even more concerning given the reported national increase in the number pupils with additional support needs towards the end of last year.

The guidance makes clear the need for flexibility when administering EMA for young people with additional support needs, because we recognise that they often require non-standard attendance patterns that might fall short of full-time criteria. We know that institutions are also encouraged to be flexible when they agree on attendance patterns for ASN pupils, and that should be agreed on and written into the pupils’ learning agreements.

We will continue to reiterate the need for that flexibility to delivery partners. In the meantime, if the member has any particular cases in which pupils with additional support needs have found themselves ineligible for the education maintenance allowance, I am happy for her to write to me with details on those matters.

Swimming Lessons (Primary School Curriculum)

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it has evaluated the extent to which swimming lessons are part of the school curriculum for primary school-aged pupils. (S6O-02943)

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

Schools in Scotland have the flexibility to decide on the content of their physical education lessons. The Scottish Government does not specifically evaluate the extent to which swimming lessons form a part of those decisions. We know that some local authorities offer swimming lessons as part of their physical education. In other cases, schools may take into account a range of factors, including the time that is required to travel to a swimming pool, in deciding against offering swimming lessons as part of PE.

However,

the Scottish Government has been working with Scottish Swimming, Education Scotland and other stakeholders to develop interventions and approaches to provide opportunities for children to become confident, competent and safer swimmers.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Learning how to swim is a life skill that has numerous physical, social and mental health benefits. I, and others, fully believe that every child should leave primary school having had the opportunity to learn to swim. Does the cabinet secretary agree that teaching our young people how to swim is an important skill that must be easily accessible to all across Scotland? Does the Government have any thoughts on how swimming lessons can be more embedded into the primary school curriculum?

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

The member

raises an extremely important point. I agree that learning to swim provides many physical and mental wellbeing benefits, and we should be mindful of that in relation to curriculum for excellence entitlements. That is why, following the publication of the evaluation of the 2022-23 pilots, the Government and Education Scotland will to work with Scottish Swimming and sportscotland to look at the best approach for maximising the uptake of swimming among children and young people of school age. I am happy to ensure that the member is kept up to date on that work and I would welcome any further input that he may wish to provide on the matter.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Access to things such as swimming, sport, culture, languages and the arts is essential for young people to enjoy learning and become fit for the future, but some are worried that there is a lack of opportunity in those areas. I asked the Government about young people’s participation in cultural activities and was told that it tracked sporting, but not cultural, activity. Is the cabinet secretary confident that all young people have an equal opportunity to experience those things and will she commit to gathering data to ensure that they are?

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

The member raises an important point. As she will know, we are looking at what more we can do through the education reform agenda to ensure that those entitlements are met.

Curriculum for excellence provides a national curriculum that is not prescriptive, which is one reason why I cannot dictate that local authorities must deliver the swimming lessons mentioned in the previous question. I will speak to officials in relation to the specific point about cultural activity, to ensure that we are meeting those entitlements. That was one of the key recommendations that came from Professor Louise Hayward’s review and I am keen that we look again at those entitlements nationally to ensure equality of access to our curriculum.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

The dangers of water are well understood in island communities such as Shetland. When I was a young child, I fell into Lerwick harbour and almost drowned. With that in mind, does the Scottish Government think that it is acceptable that 11-year-olds are leaving primary school without the life skill of being able to swim?

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

I thank the member for her question and for sharing some of her personal experience. I recognise the particular importance in island communities of having the skill of being able to swim.

As I intimated in my response to Ms Duncan-Glancy, I cannot mandate local authorities to deliver swimming education, but I am keen that we look at entitlements as part of our broader work with Education Scotland. The member’s point is hugely important and I would be keen to work with her, and with others who have an interest in the subject, to see what more we might be able to do to support schools.

We must also recognise that not all schools are in island communities and we must be mindful of local contexts and of the availability and accessibility of swimming pools. When I was at school, many years ago, we had a swimming pool in the school, but that is not the case in many schools in Scotland, so we must be mindful of the availability of swimming pools to ensure that we achieve the equity that Ms Duncan-Glancy spoke about.

Universities and Colleges (Skills Planning)

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

3. To ask the Scottish Government how it is working with universities and colleges to address the reported skills gap across the economy. (S6O-02944)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

As I confirmed to Parliament last month, and as per the recommendations made by James Withers in his report, the Scottish Government will take on skills planning at national level and will support the development of skills planning at the regional level. In so doing, we recognise that we must better align what is offered by the education and skills system with the strategic skills needs of the economy.

We are developing those approaches in close collaboration with colleges and universities and with others, particularly employers.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I have met many employers in the past year, and they consistently raise the key issue of the lack of skilled labour. What is the Government doing to encourage and support the development of skills, training and apprenticeships? Will the cuts to the Scottish Funding Council’s budget result in fewer college places?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I know that Alex Rowley knows that it is important to differentiate between skills and labour shortages and to determine, as we are doing, what skills are specifically being asked for. That is why I have asked portfolio ministerial colleagues to carry out an exercise to identify the exact nature of current and likely future skills needs and, in so doing, to engage directly with colleges and universities to determine what resources and capacity currently exist to meet those asks and how we can bring all of that together.

My direct conversations with the further and higher education sectors show that there is a strong appetite to develop the better alignment that is in everyone’s interests.

On the particular point about apprenticeships, I assure Alex Rowley that it is our intention to seek to better align those with the economic needs of the country.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There are a number of supplementary questions and I will try to get them all in.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Ensuring that there is an alignment between employers’ needs and skills provision in our colleges and universities is essential to tackling skills shortages across the economy. In that light, what work is the Government doing on a sectoral basis and with employers to ensure that the skills required now, and in the future, are identified and that the funding of colleges and universities is aligned with supporting employers’ needs?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Businesses and employers have a crucial role to play in helping to shape the provision in the system. The Government is already engaging with a wide variety of employers to look at the practicalities and options for delivering a more aligned offering. Of course, the skills planning team at Skills Development Scotland is at the forefront of that work.

Ivan McKee is right to highlight the need to approach the issue on a sectoral basis. From my direct engagement with employers, it is already clear to me that some sectors are more progressed than others when it comes to having the detail and specifics that we require in order to move forward. It may be that we pilot approaches as much on a sectoral level as on a geographical level. All that will be looked at in detail at an employers round table, which we will be putting together in the coming months. Learning providers will also be in the room, because we need all sides to be directly involved in order to deliver an agile, aligned and responsive skills and learning system.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

According to research from the Fraser of Allander Institute, Scotland’s colleges boosted the Scottish economy by more than £8 billion, which is a more than tenfold return on investment.

What impact will last year’s £26 million cut and the proposed £58.7 million cut to the net college resource, which is proposed in the Government’s draft budget, have on that £8 billion contribution?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I think that t

he £26 million that Liam Kerr referred to is the transition fund, so it will have no direct impact.

The £58 million that he referred to was, of course, in line with the moneys that were reduced in year. In reality, the current year’s money for the colleges will match almost entirely the substance of their budget for next year.

In an ideal world, we would like to be able to better fund our colleges. If Mr Kerr has any constructive ideas as we go through the budget process, we will be all ears.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

With regard to the current skills gap, how is the Scottish Government working with universities and colleges to promote the uptake of modern languages?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Government is clear that access to learning modern languages is vital at all stages of education to equip children and young people with the skills that they need in an increasingly globalised world.

However, universities are autonomous institutions that are responsible for their course provision. It is for them to decide how to distribute the allocation of funded places between faculties and courses. Similarly, operational decisions, including resourcing and course provision, are matters for individual colleges. In both instances, we would look for that to be done in line with the needs of learners and the local economy.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Q

uestions 4 and 5 were not lodged.

Violence in Schools

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

6. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what action it is taking to tackle violence in schools and the impact that this is having on both pupils and staff. (S6O-02947)

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

No teacher, member of staff or pupil should have to suffer abuse in our schools. The series of summits that I held with a wide range of stakeholders on behaviour in schools concluded in November, and the behaviour in Scottish schools research, which has been published, provides an accurate national picture of behaviour in Scotland’s schools.

In my statement to the Parliament on 29 November, I confirmed that a multiyear plan is in development to tackle instances of challenging behaviour through working with local authorities, trade unions and others. The plan will be published as soon as possible.

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

I welcome that update and the different points that the cabinet secretary made in relation to progress. I fully agree that no one in our schools should feel unsafe or suffer abuse of any kind. I am pleased that the final stage of the series of behaviour stakeholder summits has taken place.

What particular attention is being given to tackling gender-based violence in our schools, which affects both pupils and staff? What engagement has there been with expert organisations such as Zero Tolerance, White Ribbon and SHE—Social, Health and Education—Scotland in my constituency?

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

I am very concerned by the findings in the BISS research in relation to increased misogyny in our schools, which, as has been pointed out, was found to affect both pupils and staff.

In the coming weeks, we will publish a national gender-based violence framework for schools, which will support them in preventing and responding to gender-based violence.

We will also continue to work very closely with key stakeholders, including those that Ben Macpherson mentioned, on the gender-based violence in schools working group, which we jointly chair with Zero Tolerance and Rape Crisis Scotland. That work will ensure that the framework not only supports schools in tackling gender-based violence and sexual harassment, but supports everyone in our schools so that they are protected and cared for and have their rights and needs respected.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There are a number of supplementary questions. We have a little time in hand this afternoon, so I will take them all, but that is not an invitation to go on for overly long. I ask again for brevity.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I have been inundated with correspondence from constituents who are raising concerns about the widespread violence in Fife schools. In Fife, 71 per cent of teachers who responded to a recent Educational Institute of Scotland survey reported experiencing violence on a daily basis, while officials said that members had been hospitalised due to physical attacks. It is concerning to see that we now have teenagers in Dunfermline engaging in attacks outside the school grounds. Such violence, including gender-based violence, has to stop. I am sure that the cabinet secretary accepts that any delay in dealing with the matter will allow violence to escalate and embed. When will the Government’s plans be implemented to support our teachers and parents?

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

T

he member raises a number of important points. She commented on some specific cases that I have not been sighted on, but if she wants to share any further detail with me, I would be keen to see it.

We will use the national research that has been published through the BISS research to inform our decision making around the national action plan. We must be cognisant, too, that we need to trust teachers in our classrooms to deliver the learning, teaching and behaviour that we expect in our schools. Yesterday, I visited two schools in Glasgow that are working to embed strong relationships to support better behaviour across the board.

We are working at pace on the plan with the Scottish advisory group on relationships and behaviour in schools and with the wider range of partners that I mentioned in my response to Mr Macpherson. In December, I met teaching unions, following my update to the Parliament, to discuss our response. We expect to publish the plan early this year. I am more than happy to write to Roz McCall with more detail on that. She will understand that, as cabinet secretary, I require the buy-in of and co-production with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, given that it runs our schools. I recognise the urgency of the issue, as the member intimated in her question.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

In just the past few weeks, I have met a pupil support assistant with a broken wrist and a teacher who is off on long-term sick leave because of stress, both as a result of violence in the classroom. The education secretary knows that there is some disappointment and a degree of anger that the message from the statement in December was that teachers need better training. That cannot be the answer—they need more in-class support and more specialist support. I urge the education secretary to look again at the issue of boundaries and consequences, because I think that we have got that out of kilter. Will she look at that again to make sure that we get it right?

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

The member made similar suggestions in a debate at the end of the previous term. I tried to intervene on him at that time, but he did not allow me to do so, if he recalls. That was not the message from my statement to the Parliament at the end of term. My statement very much recognised the challenges, but we also need to be cognisant, as a Parliament, that the Government does not run our schools directly. We trust our local authorities, such as Fife Council in the member’s constituency, to support their school staff on the ground. The Government also has a responsibility here, which is why I introduced the national action plan, but that has to be done in conjunction with local authorities.

The member has given a number of examples, and he has talked again about consequences. I have been very clear that the national action plan will set out some of that in more detail. The feedback from headteachers at the BISS research events included a call for more of that to be set out at national level. I am keen to give that clarity so that headteachers understand the options that they have at their disposal. However, we need to be careful not to patronise the profession, which very much recognises how to develop and deliver good-quality learning and teaching and how to set boundaries for our young people. As part of that process, teachers also need support from their local authorities. That is why local authorities and COSLA must be key to the development of the national action plan and to the SAGRABIS work that I mentioned in my response to Roz McCall.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

In order to

get in the next supplementary questions, I will need a bit more brevity in both the questions and the responses.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Thank you for your indulgence, Presiding Officer.

The cabinet secretary will know that non-contact time is crucial in addressing the conditions in schools. Does she have the report that she commissioned on delivering that? If she does, when will she be able to share some of the detail with the Parliament?

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

I very much agree with the member on this issue. I do not yet have that report from my officials, but I am happy to write to the member as soon as I have received it, because I recognise the ask for additionality in relation to class contact time.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That is the example to follow.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

What support can the Scottish Government offer to Northfield academy, in my Aberdeen Donside constituency, given that Education Scotland inspectors recently stated that more needs to be done to make pupils feel safe?

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

As the member will know, I visited Northfield academy back in August to understand the action that it was taking to address some of the concerns at the school. Undeniably, a number of challenges remain, but I am advised that the leadership team at the school is committed to driving improvements for pupils and staff alike.

Although decisions on the specific support that might be needed are matters for local authorities and schools, as part of our commitment to ensuring that schools are safe and consistent environments for all, we are working on the national action plan that I mentioned in previous responses.

Specifically in relation to Northfield academy, I have requested from my officials an update from the interim chief inspector of education on any additional support that we might be able to provide the school and the local authority at this time.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Given the extent of the problem, does the cabinet secretary think that it would be worth while to encourage schools to get the debate on this issue going at a local level—with the involvement of parents, pupils, teachers and all staff in the schools—to try to resolve it at a local level and engage people on the problem?

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

The member makes an interesting and positive suggestion. Yes, I think that it would be worth doing that.

Over the past few months, a number of pieces of research have been published on behaviour in Scotland’s schools. At the turn of the year, research was published on attendance and the integration of home and school during the pandemic. That is part of the challenge, so it would be worth while pursuing the member’s suggestion about a local approach to re-engage families with the school. I would be more than happy to work with the member on that issue.

Traditional Skills (Training Programmes)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to address any challenges in relation to the accessibility of traditional skills programmes to ensure that young people have access to the same career opportunities. (S6O-02948)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Historic Environment Scotland continues to champion traditional skills and is working with stakeholders across the country to address traditional skills gaps to ensure that our historic buildings can thrive as part of the country’s sustainable future.

In addition, Skills Development Scotland delivers careers information, advice and guidance in all state secondary schools and in dedicated centres and community locations nationwide. Its all-age service empowers people from all communities to make their own learning and career decisions based on the best available career intelligence.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The closure of Edinburgh College’s stonemasonry programme has raised serious concerns about the future of stonemasonry in the capital and across Scotland. A recent stonemasonry survey report found that more than 200,000 buildings in Scotland were built before 1919, and it stated that we will

“need a healthy supply of stonemasons to adapt”

them

“to ensure our buildings are fit for purpose ... for decades to come”.

What work is the Scottish Government doing to provide for future generations of stonemasons? What work is being undertaken to develop new models to deliver national courses and apprenticeship schemes?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I associate myself with Miles Briggs’s comments in relation to the importance of the matter. As he does, I recognise the need to ensure that stonemasonry, like other traditional skills, is prioritised in our apprenticeship and training offering. The Minister for Culture, Europe and International Development and I have tasked Historic Environment Scotland with developing proposals for a sustainable future model that ensures that we will continue to be able to access the skills that are required to maintain our historic buildings.

However, it must be recognised that delivery of stonemasonry apprenticeships is costly and that the number of apprentices involved do not provide a sufficient critical mass to allow for courses to be delivered across a multitude of locations. Therefore—although I do not wish to prejudge matters—a model involving a centre or centres of excellence might be the best way forward. Currently, three colleges—City of Glasgow College, UHI Moray and Forth Valley College—are engaged in such delivery.

I hope that I have provided Miles Briggs with some reassurance. Given his long-standing and genuine interest in the topic, I would be happy to continue to engage with him on it.

Schools (Pupil Wellbeing)

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that teachers are fully equipped to safeguard the wellbeing of pupils. (S6O-02949)

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

The wellbeing and safety of children and young people in Scotland is a key priority for the Government. Our national guidance for child protection in Scotland describes the responsibilities and expectations for everyone who works with children and young people, and it emphasises the key role that the education workforce has in supporting and protecting children.

Education Scotland’s safeguarding in education national network brings together local authority leads to share safeguarding and education practice. The professional standards for Scotland’s teachers also set out the role of teachers in ensuring the wellbeing and safety of children and young people.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Last month, the United Kingdom Government published comprehensive guidance for teachers on how to support pupils who question their gender in schools. The guidance acknowledges the critical role that biological sex plays in maintaining safety and promoting equality in schools, and it recognises the profound psychological effects that social transitioning has on young people and the need for parental involvement in such life-changing decisions. Does the cabinet secretary agree that teachers should be fully equipped to discuss those issues with pupils? Will the Government introduce the same guidance for Scottish schools?

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

As the member might be aware, we are currently reviewing our relationships, sexual health and parenthood guidance, the consultation on which closed at the end of November last year. We received more than 4,000 responses to the consultation, which my officials are currently analysing. A report on that consultation will be produced shortly.

The initial findings suggest that the guidance needs to give more clarity, and it will be updated in the light of that feedback and other findings of the consultation in due course. I would be more than happy to write to the member with an update as soon as we publish the consultation data.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That

concludes portfolio question time. There will be a brief pause before we move on to the next item of business.

Public Service Values

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-11831, in the name of Shona Robison, on Scotland’s public service values. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak button. I note that we do not yet seem to have with us in the chamber the Government minister who is responsible for closing the debate. Perhaps that could be chased up. Nonetheless, we will have to start the debate in his absence, which is regrettable. I call the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Shona Robison, to speak to and move the motion.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

People across Scotland, including all of us in the chamber, rely on public services, whether we are talking about the high-quality education and training that our children and young people get, the access to the right treatment and care that our loved ones need when they are unwell, the support that victims and witnesses of crime receive through the justice system or the support that the most vulnerable members of our community obtain through our progressive social security system.

This Government is determined to maintain and improve our public services, despite our facing the most challenging financial situation since devolution. Our block grant funding, which is derived from United Kingdom Government spending, has fallen by 1.2 per cent in real terms since 2022-23, and our capital spending power is due to contract by almost 10 per cent in real terms over five years.

Our approach to maintaining our public services is informed by our shared values, as set out in Scotland’s national performance framework, which include treating people with kindness, dignity and compassion. Those values, alongside our missions of equality, opportunity and community, guide everything that we do. We believe that everyone in Scotland should experience high-quality services that are delivered effectively and efficiently, and that, when people need further support for whatever reason, public services should be able to identify those needs early, build relationships with them to understand their needs and work together to support them in whatever way they need to be supported.

Crucially, we also believe that those people with the broadest shoulders should be asked to contribute a little more. That is right and fair, and our progressive approach—our social contract—sets Scotland apart from the rest of the UK.

As I have said many times, the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s autumn statement was a worst-case scenario for Scotland. The fiscal settlement from the UK Government undermines the viability of public services in Scotland and, indeed, of services across the whole of the UK. Responsibility for the situation lies with the UK Government, which has brought us a decade of austerity, Brexit’s undermining of living standards and the calamitous Liz Truss mini-budget. Furthermore, when drawing up his autumn statement, the chancellor was faced with a choice on how to use the £27 billion of fiscal headroom that he had available to him. He chose to cut taxes at the expense of public services. Indeed, real-terms cuts are being made across a number of UK Government departments, including the Department for Health and Social Care.

Our values and missions are at the heart of the 2024-25 Scottish budget and have informed all the choices that we have made in response to an incredibly challenging economic environment. Importantly, the UK Government has not similarly prioritised public services through its recent policy decisions—in fact, it has done quite the reverse.

Within the constraints of the current devolution settlement, we are using all the powers that are available to us to maximise investment in our public services. Indeed, the Scottish Fiscal Commission has estimated that our income tax policy choices since devolution will raise an additional £1.45 billion in 2024-25 compared with what would have happened if we had matched UK Government policy.

Those spending decisions build on our successful legacy of investing in our public services and delivering meaningful reform that has improved outcomes for many people across Scotland. For example, the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 underpins the most significant public service reform since devolution and continues to deliver significant savings and improved outcomes. Police Scotland is on track to deliver cumulative savings of more than £2 billion by 2026, and the creation of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has removed around £482 million from the fire service cost base over the past 10 years.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I very much agree with the cabinet secretary in relation to the reforms of the police and fire services and about the decluttering of the public service landscape. Does she think that there is scope for further decluttering?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Yes, I do. There is a lot of opportunity and scope for shared services and public bodies working together and, in some cases, potentially merging. However, we must be careful that, in doing so, we keep the focus on delivery rather than on organisational change, because there is a danger of focusing on the latter. In my 48-page letter to the Finance and Public Administration Committee, which I sent before Christmas, I laid out some of the detail of our extensive 10-year reform programme. I am happy to hear suggestions about how we can go further than that.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I am still a bit shocked that the cabinet secretary is relying on police reform as an example of great reform by the Scottish Government. We had three chief constables in almost as many years. Police reform cost more money than it saved, and the reality is that it was a disaster, especially the centralisation of control rooms. Why is the cabinet secretary using that as an example?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

T

he most important outcome of police reform is the outcomes for victims of serious crime, particularly sexual offences, rape and murder, and the results that Police Scotland has been able to deliver consistently across Scotland.

We have also prioritised tackling poverty, particularly child poverty, and we have made significant progress by working collaboratively and creatively with partners. As a result of this Government’s policy interventions, including the expansion of the Scottish child payment, it is estimated that 90,000 fewer children will live in relative and absolute poverty in 2023-24. [

Interruption

.] I know that the Tories do not want to hear about child poverty, but this Government wants to talk about child poverty.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I take this opportunity to interject. If members wish to raise an issue, they know that there are ways to do that, including by standing up and seeking to make an intervention.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As I said,

it is estimated that 90,000 fewer children will live in relative and absolute poverty in 2023-24. Notably, poverty levels are lower in Scotland than they are in England.

For more than 75 years, our national health service has been a universal public service, free for all at the point of need. We are resolutely committed to those founding principles and have a strong record of investing in our health and social care sector. For example, we have invested £193 million in our national treatment centres programme. We opened two new centres in Fife and Highland in spring last year, and two further centres will open or expand early this year. Together, the centres are planning to deliver more than 20,000 additional procedures by 2024-25, which will improve patient outcomes.

Alongside mitigating the impacts of UK Government decisions, the scale of the current financial challenge means that we must change the way that we deliver public services in Scotland. In the short term, we need to reduce costs and improve effectiveness further. However, as we look at the demographic projections for Scotland, which were made worse by Brexit and the UK Government’s approach to immigration, combined with the anticipated level of demand on public services, we know that we must change the way that we deliver services in the long term to fundamentally improve people’s lives and reduce their need for on-going support.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Inward migration into the UK was at a record level last year, but that was not the case for Scotland. Why?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Actually, if we look at net in-migration from the rest of the UK, at least 10,000 people—who may have come from various parts of the world previously—are moving from the rest of the UK to Scotland, and 7,000 of those who are coming each year are of working age. I would have thought that the Tories would welcome that, but clearly not.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

No, thank you.

In December, I provided the Finance and Public Audit Committee with a detailed update that set out the Government’s aims and principles for an ambitious 10-year programme of public service reform. The update included the actions that we need to take over the next two years to bring together a common approach for reform; to further align our policies and reform programmes; and to enable and empower our partners to act.

In short, the Government’s vision is for all public services to be person centred and designed around the unique needs of individuals; to be focused on prevention and prioritising early intervention and support to reduce the need for crisis intervention in the future; to be place based and designed in ways that best meet the distinctive needs of communities across Scotland; and to be built on partnership and creative collaboration with partners.

Achieving that vision will not be easy, and the Scottish Government cannot do that alone. We therefore want to build a consensus around those new ways of working with local government, the third sector and other partners in order to achieve it.

The Government has a clear plan to deliver reform. We are working with local government and the public to take forward reforms that enable us to change how services are delivered at a local level. We remain committed to delivering the local governance review and the democracy matters initiative alongside the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities; to exploring single authority models; and to delivering on commitments to reform, funding and accountability in the Verity house agreement.

We are aligning all of our major policy reforms and investments around our shared vision for public services. Across our education and skills sector, we are reforming to make sure that everyone in Scotland is supported to fulfil their potential. We will continue to support schools and local authorities to improve the attainment of children and young people who are impacted by poverty; that is underpinned by £1 billion-worth of investment in the school attainment challenge in the current session of Parliament.

We are continuing to reform our justice system to prioritise victims and witnesses; to protect front-line services; to make better use of digital approaches; and to support greater collaboration between partners to keep communities safe. In health and social care, the development of the national care service builds on our strong commitment to high-quality, consistent and fair public services. Our programme of co-design is making sure that people are at the heart of those developments, and that human rights principles are embedded, as we deliver for the more than 230,000 people in Scotland who receive social care support.

We are also driving innovation and making public services more efficient, as set out in the resource spending review. Our single Scottish estate programme has already reduced the size and cost of, and emissions from, the public sector estate. It has delivered savings of more than £4 million through the co-location of services and the closure of surplus offices in Edinburgh and Dundee. Work is under way to consolidate the public sector estate in Glasgow from five premises into one new net zero carbon property to deliver associated carbon reductions alongside anticipated revenue savings of more than £3 million a year from 2028-29.

We are expanding the use of national collaborative procurement. That approach has the potential to deliver significant efficiencies: for every £1 that is invested in Scottish Government-led collaborative procurement, more than £40 is returned in financial benefits. In 2022-23, more than £130 million was saved through that approach.

Digital technology and infrastructure is also a key enabler of public service reform. For example, we invested £1.8 million in a new digital dermatology service in 2023. The programme has the potential to reduce demand for out-patient appointments by up to 50 per cent, and it will lead to a better and quicker service for patients as well as reducing pressure on our workforce. The Scottish Government is continuing to review its own workforce numbers carefully to ensure that we are delivering for the people of Scotland as effectively and efficiently as possible. From March 2022 to the end of September 2023, the size of our contingent workforce has reduced by 27 per cent, thereby reducing reliance on temporary staff and contractors.

I have been clear that the Scottish Government cannot do this alone. Collaboration is central to how we deliver ambitious reform across the public sector. In the past year, we have strengthened our collaboration with local government, public bodies, business and the third sector. We have worked effectively with the Scottish Green Party through the Bute house agreement, and I welcome continued collaboration across this Parliament as we seek to deliver collectively for the people of Scotland.

I move,

That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Government’s continued investment in delivering public services for Scotland’s people and communities; notes, however, the economic damage of Brexit, which means up to £3.7 billion of potential funding for these services has been lost; recognises the Scottish Government’s legacy of successful public service reform in recent years that has improved outcomes for people and communities, including health and social care partnerships and Social Security Scotland; further recognises the valuable role that public sector workers play in delivering precious public services; supports the Scottish Government’s ambitious public service reform projects in the education, justice and health and social care sectors, which will deliver further reforms over the next decade, including by focusing on prevention and early intervention, involving people and communities in the design of public services and embracing the power of digital technologies; believes that further reform to public services will be necessary to ensure that public services remain fiscally sustainable and continue to improve outcomes for Scotland’s people and communities, and welcomes, therefore, constructive contributions from partners across the public sector, third sector and business community, as all stakeholders work to protect and reform Scotland’s public services together.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as a practising NHS general practitioner.

We have listened to the Deputy First Minister, who talks as if the SNP has not actually been in charge of public services for the past 16 years. Once again, this SNP Government treats the people who really matter—the public, and public sector workers—as if they are fools. SNP ministers persistently refuse to admit their failures. They expect everyone to believe that they are competent despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary—and, to pay for their incompetence, they go all out to tax workers and businesses for working hard. The Scottish Retail Consortium says that the SNP Government will be back for even more in taxes next year because it will fail to reform the public sector.

The Deputy First Minister claims that her party has created a

“legacy of successful public service reform ... that has improved outcomes for people and communities”,

including in health and social care. Really? That is as delusional as Humza Yousaf’s fantasy economics and his calculation that independence would lead to Scottish households being £10,000 a year better off.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The member mentioned health and social care, which gives me an opportunity to ask him why his Government is reducing health and social care spending. It is down by £8 billion, which represents a cut of 4.7 per cent. How can he justify that?

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I think that the Deputy First Minister needs to concentrate on the facts. Not only is this the Scottish Parliament, but you are in charge of healthcare here in Scotland, and what you should be doing—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I remind all members that they need to speak through the chair. Otherwise, they are referring to me, and I have no responsibility in that regard.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

It is little wonder that, on 20 November 2023, the

Deputy First Minister refused to confirm, when asked, whether SNP ministers always tell the truth.

Today, we are debating Scotland’s public service values. Let us start by considering the SNP’s catalogue of shame in respect of the public services of healthcare, education and procurement. We have lengthy accident and emergency waiting times, and targets have not been met. We have worsening cancer treatment waiting times, with a quarter of patients waiting two months to see a specialist, and today we have seen reports that Scotland has some of the worst cancer survival rates in the world. We have woeful workforce planning and a lack of ambition while vacancy rates for nurses are at record levels and the rates across many other NHS professions are at a four-year high. On public health, the SNP has by its own admission taken its eye off the ball. Drug and alcohol-related deaths are higher in Scotland than anywhere else in Europe. Some 1,300 babies have been born with drug dependency since 2017. That is disgraceful.

This SNP Government is all about soundbites and promises that it consistently fails to deliver on, telling us each time that lessons will be learned. Let us consider school-age children. The SNP has failed to address the educational attainment gap. That is another failed promise. Sixteen years of botched SNP reforms that blew £1 billion have ruined an education system that was once the envy of the world. According to a poll in

The Scotsman

just this week, the majority of Scots believe that the SNP is running public services poorly.

The SNP also sets a very low bar when it comes to setting an example to others in Scotland. There is a police investigation into the party’s finances, which is fuelling doubts about transparency and adherence to the rule of law. Of course, we are well accustomed to the SNP blaming its failures and incompetence on others. I am not talking about the Scottish Greens, although some in this chamber clearly blame them.

The SNP is also quick off the mark in making claims about others that do not stand up to scrutiny. For example, a misleading post on the Scottish Government’s official Twitter account claims that the autumn statement resulted in only an extra £10.8 million of funding for our NHS. However, that is just spin, because HM Treasury provided a record £43 billion to fund public services in Scotland, and the Scottish Government can spend the funding in any way that it wants. [

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Members!

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

In the same way, the SNP Government decided not to spend on Scotland’s NHS the £18 billion that it has received by way of consequentials from NHS spending down south since coming to power.

It is about SNP choices, such as having 160 officials—costing £9.77 million a year—working on preparations for a bloated national care service.

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

Will Sandesh Gulhane give way?

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

No.

Other examples are the spending of £7 million per year on pretend overseas embassies, millions of pounds on a failed deposit return scheme and hundreds of millions of pounds on ferries—I could go on.

While we lament the performance of the SNP-Green Government, we must stress our admiration for Scotland’s amazing public sector workers, who deliver vital services. The trouble is, those workers are undermined by the SNP Government’s mismanagement, year in and year out, and by the SNP’s failure to properly support local government. To deliver well and stay true to public service values, we need to do things differently. We need to recognise a reorganisation of Scotland’s public sector that prioritises efficiency, preventative care and productivity.

No one is saying that reform is easy. The Scottish Parliament Finance and Public Administration Committee has been tasked with conducting an inquiry into such reform. That is important work. Audit Scotland has called for urgent reform and highlights that the SNP-Green Scottish Government has made no progress since 2016. It is vital to deliver reform in order to deal with long-term financial pressures.

The Scottish Conservatives believe that the principles of the Christie commission on the future delivery of public services are as important today as they were when they were published in 2011. Back then, the Scottish Government was told:

“Unless Scotland embraces a radical, new, collaborative culture throughout our public services, both budgets and provision will buckle under the strain”,

with a

“fragmented, complex and opaque”

system hampering the collaboration between organisations, and an approach that is

“’top-down’ and ... lacks accountability”,

while failing to deliver to meet the needs of individuals and communities.

The Scottish Government has not heeded what the Christie commission said. Instead, the SNP has the highest taxes in the UK, despite receiving around £2,000 more per Scot than is received from the UK Treasury for people in the rest of the United Kingdom.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will Sandesh Gulhane take an intervention?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Dr Gulhane is about to conclude.