Scottish Parliament, 22 February 2024

381 contributions from 75 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good morning. The first item of business is general question time.

“Read Write Count with the First Minister"

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

1. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the “Read Write Count with the First Minister” programme. (S6O-03110)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The “Read Write Count with the First Minister” programme is an important part of the Scottish Government’s commitment to raising attainment by building parents’ confidence and encouraging families to include reading, writing and counting activities in their everyday lives. The programme provides literacy and numeracy materials to pupils in primaries 2 and 3 and, last year, 248,000 books were provided to children across Scotland. The Scottish Government is working with the Scottish Book Trust to finalise arrangements for the provision of materials in 2024.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

East Kilbride has more than 20 recognised reading schools, including the gold-accredited St Andrew’s and St Bride’s high school. Initiatives such as the reading schools and the read, write, count programme are helping with attainment by building parents’ confidence and by ensuring that books and activities are supplied to children.

However, despite the Scottish Government doing that good work, the Labour-run South Lanarkshire Council is threatening to close Greenhills library and the Greenhills community hall, which are widely used by reading groups and toddler groups. In my view, that would potentially increase the poverty-related attainment gap. Does the minister share my concerns and those of the 1,700 locals who have signed a petition against the closure of those facilities that the Labour-run council’s proposals will be bad for the community? Can he reiterate the benefits of the Scottish Government’s budget for South Lanarkshire Council?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I understand the member’s concerns and those of her constituents, which she has articulated. Library services are a vital and valued community resource.

In relation to the budget question, South Lanarkshire Council will in 2024-25 receive £742.7 million to fund local services, which equates to an extra £45.9 million—an additional 6.6 per cent—compared to 2023-24 to support vital day-to-day provision. Although such decisions are ultimately for the council to take, the Government is, despite the cuts to our budget, providing a fair funding settlement.

College Operational Expenditure Budget 2024-25 (Impact on Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact of the £58.7 million reduction to the college operational expenditure budget for 2024-25 on the Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire constituency. (S6O-03111)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Scottish budget allocates funding to the college sector as a whole. Indicative funding allocations for colleges are expected to be set out by the Scottish Funding Council in spring 2024, as is normally the case. Once allocations are published, each college will know its position and will therefore be able to consider any impact, although I know that individual colleges are already working on their projections based on a working assumption that there will be flat cash, or a slight reduction in funding. The SFC is endeavouring to deliver a core teaching funding allocation that is as close as possible to the core teaching funding that colleges received in 2023-24.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Colleges such as Borders College in my constituency play a vital role in communities by upskilling future generations. As a direct result of the resource spending cuts, students will now see their learning opportunities diminish, with colleges having to make tough choices about what subjects they can offer, which staff they can keep and, crucially, how many students they can offer places to. The minister can make all the excuses that he wants, but it is clear that the Scottish National Party has either forgotten about the importance of colleges or just does not care about them. Which is it, minister?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

We have the usual crocodile tears from the Tories. Let us not forget where the budget problems are coming from: Westminster. We are involved in detailed and direct discussions with the colleges about future budgets and their impacts, as is the SFC.

Through the reform agenda, there is detailed engagement with colleges on the long-term future to try to ensure that future provision meets the needs of employers, the economy and learners, not only at national level but more locally, and that we take account of the fact that delivering in areas such as the Borders can come at a greater cost than delivering in other parts of the country. A considerable amount of work is going on directly with colleges.

The Presiding Officer

Let us keep our questions and answers concise, please.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Despite a challenging and difficult financial climate that has been created by irresponsible and reckless Conservative fiscal policy, I welcome the fact that the Scottish Government has increased investment in the education and skills budget by £128 million.

In respect of college budgets, can the minister share how the starting position for 2024-25 compares with the end position for 2023-24?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

As I said a moment ago, the aim is for the funds available to colleges at the start of the 2024-25 financial year to be very similar to the funds that were actually invested in colleges in the current financial year. That is despite an incredibly challenging set of financial circumstances.

We are doing everything that we can to support our colleges and universities, recognising their extraordinary impact on our economy and society and the pivotal roles that we see for both sectors.

Parole Board for Scotland

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to review the operations of the Parole Board for Scotland. (S6O-03112)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I recognise the critical role that the Parole Board for Scotland plays in our justice system. The Scottish Government works with the independent Parole Board to support its statutory functions, including, for example, reviewing and updating Parole Board rules to ensure that they remain fit for purpose.

The rules were updated in 2021 and 2022, and there are no current plans to review them further at this stage, but I am keeping the matter under close and careful consideration. As the member will appreciate, decisions that the Parole Board makes in the exercise of its statutory functions are taken independently of Scottish ministers.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

The Parliament recently updated the rules for the Parole Board, giving, in that update, victims certain rights that dictate what the board must do. However, the Parliament also gave the board wider powers that it could use. Is the cabinet secretary content that the board is doing everything that it possibly can for victims instead of limiting itself to what it must do?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

It is critical that the views of victims are heard at all stages in the justice system, and that includes parole. No part of the justice system is beyond scrutiny or challenge, particularly when it comes to what more we can do to support victims.

As has been highlighted, the Parole Board rules were updated in 2021 and 2022, as a result of which victims or their family members can now apply to the board to observe hearings. Of course, that is a matter for the legal chair, but the chair has facilitated that on many occasions.

The update also builds on the existing rights of victims to make representations in writing or verbally to members of the Parole Board before decisions are made. Valuable work is also undertaken by the victims team that sits within the Parole Board. I am conscious, though, that I have correspondence outstanding with the member in relation to victims’ rights vis-à-vis the wider powers to which he refers.

Local Authorities

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of its current relationship with local authorities. (S6O-03113)

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The Scottish Government recognises the value that local government contributes in delivering vital services across the country. Since the Verity house agreement was signed in June last year, good progress has been made, and there are a number of positive examples of collaborative working between central and local Government.

Through my monthly relationship meetings with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities presidential team, we jointly review the progress on our collaborative working on an on-going basis. The First Minister and Deputy First Minister met the COSLA presidential team last week to discuss the importance of our relationships, and the DFM and I met COSLA political leaders just yesterday.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Well, that was an optimistic response from the minister, because everybody knows that the Verity house agreement is dead in the water. We have all seen the letter from the Deputy First Minister that was sent at some point yesterday; true to form, it was leaked to the

Daily Record

. So much, then, for the Government’s fully funded council tax freeze. If the minister and the Deputy First Minister think that that shows a functioning working relationship between the Scottish National Party Government and local government, they are mistaken.

Some councils are setting their budgets today, and some set their budgets last week. Does the minister agree that, by the chaos that his Government has created through the Scottish Government budget process—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

—

he and the rest of the Government have shown their complete disdain for local democracy?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

No, I do not. I am surprised by Stephen Kerr’s question about the council tax freeze, because I thought that the Conservatives supported it. I certainly know that the people of Scotland support it. The Scottish Government believes that, at a time when rising prices are putting significant strain on household finances—a situation largely caused by the actions of his United Kingdom Government—the freeze will give some certainty to households over the coming years. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

It is really important to remember that council tax payers on the lowest incomes will proportionately, relative to their incomes, benefit the most from the council tax freeze. Taken alongside our income tax policies, that is independently recognised as being progressive.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

In an attempt to repair the damaged relationship with local government, it has been reported, as Mr Kerr has said, that the cabinet secretary has offered to restore the £63 million that was previously cut from council budgets. Is that restoration of funding dependent on councils agreeing the council tax freeze?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The Deputy First Minister previously indicated that, subject to the UK budget next week, £45 million of consequentials will come from the UK Government’s decision to give some additional ring-fenced funding to local government. She has since announced that she wants to increase that to the full amount of nearly £63 million. The big challenge is in ensuring that that money is real, and I call on colleagues across the chamber to demand that the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer makes sure that the budget on 6 March protects services and does not give more tax cuts to the wealthy.

Railway Infrastructure

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that railway infrastructure is safe and fit for the future. (S6O-03114)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Safety of the railway is a key priority for the Scottish ministers, although it is ultimately a matter that is reserved to the United Kingdom Government. The Office of Rail and Road, which is the independent rail regulator, is responsible for ensuring that Network Rail meets its safety responsibilities and determines the appropriate funding. The Scottish Government has fully funded Network Rail Scotland in line with the ORR’s recommendations, and it is investing record sums in rail, with total funding of £1.6 billion for the rail sector in Scotland in 2024-25. That compares with pre-pandemic levels of £0.9 billion to £1 billion.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Springburn railway station does not offer step-free access, which makes it inaccessible to wheelchair users. The Scottish Government must do all that is within its gift to ensure equal access to Scotland’s railways. Will the minister make representation to the Department for Transport to press for access for all scheme funding for control period 7, so that much-needed improvements can be made at last to Springburn railway station?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I understand that Paul Sweeney has just written to me, and I think that I have just replied—it might have been a written question. As he recognises, the accessibility programme and funding that he alluded to are the responsibility of the UK Government. Like him, I will ensure that accessibility is a key priority in my discussions with Network Rail, the ORR and others. Indeed, I will leave the Parliament this afternoon to have a meeting with mobility and access groups.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Tragically, a train derailment at Carmont on the Aberdeen to Dundee line in 2020 resulted in the loss of three lives. What work has been done to improve safety and resilience on the Aberdeen to Dundee line?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Our thoughts remain first and foremost with all those who were affected by the tragic accident at Carmont.

Although, as I have said, rail safety is reserved to the UK Government, Scottish ministers are committed to doing everything that we can to prevent accidents and ensure that passengers travel safely on our rail network. Network Rail, which has overall responsibility for the network, is addressing the infrastructure recommendations that are set out in the Rail Accident Investigation Branch’s report, which followed that tragic derailment.

For example, there is better management of civil engineering construction activities by Network Rail and its contractors, and operational responses to extreme rainfall events have improved through the use of the full capability of modern technology and a detailed understanding of the risks that are associated with extreme rainfall, as well as other matters. As I set out in my previous answer, we are fully funding maintenance and future proofing.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

T

he report into Carmont showed that the class 43 high-speed trains were thought to be partially responsible for the consequences. When will the class 43 be replaced?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The question on infrastructure covers the network infrastructure. The member is referring to the fleet itself, so I refer him to the reports on Carmont.

I have had discussions with the unions and ScotRail about future provision. As the member might be aware, we are looking carefully at the timing and when, in relation to other matters, the fleet will be replaced.

Scottish Parliament Powers (Referendum)

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

6. To ask the Scottish Government, as part of its work to further the case for Scottish independence, and in light of the Supreme Court ruling that the Scottish Parliament cannot legislate for a referendum on Scottish independence, for what reason its position is that there should not be a referendum at this stage on the powers of the Scottish Parliament. (S6O-03115)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

In line with the mandate that was secured democratically at the 2021 Scottish Parliament election, the Scottish Government wants to hold a referendum on Scottish independence that would lead to Scottish independence, rather than a referendum on the powers of the Scottish Parliament that would fall short of that. For that reason, we do not plan to hold such a referendum at this stage. When any proposal for such a referendum emerges, we will give it proper consideration.

Through our “Building a New Scotland” series of prospectus papers, we continue to set out the positive case for independence as an alternative to the broken Brexit Britain—now in recession—that the Tories, Labour and Liberal Democrats support.

Ash Regan

This year it will be 10 years since the independence referendum—10 years of a majority Government. With respect, minister, papers can be produced by anyone. What the independence movement wants at this point is action. Time is of the essence, and the Government should embrace the opportunity to give Scots the power to tell the world that they want the Scottish Parliament to negotiate and legislate for independence. If they do not, this entire five-year parliamentary term will have been wasted. The minister can perhaps enlighten us: what is the point of a pro-independence majority if it is not used to pursue independence?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

That is exactly what we are doing—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members!

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

We do not even have a draft proposal with the consequential consultation, let alone a final proposal before the Parliament. However, and with respect to Ms Regan, I have literally just said that if such a proposal emerges, we will give it full consideration.

Of course, the manifesto that I stood on—which she also stood on—said that we should have a referendum. We have that mandate, and that should be respected.

We have also set out that we would take forward the work that we are doing through the “Building a New Scotland” series of prospectus papers. I have brought four debates to the chamber on the BANS paper—on the written constitution on 27 June and on migration on 14 November last year, and on Scotland’s place in the European Union on 30 January and on social security on 20 February this year. I know that the member has not been able to take part in any of those debates, but the good news is that she and all members of this place will have the opportunity to do so in the future, because we will continue to take forward that work.

Young People (Care)

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the First Minister’s reported comments that it “has to go further” to ensure that plans to radically reform how young people are cared for in Scotland are realised, whether it has identified what steps it will take to achieve this. (S6O-03116)

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

The Scottish Government is clear in its commitment to keep the Promise. We have made good progress but, of course, we can always go further. Action is under way across ministerial portfolios, including progress to stage 3 of the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill, engagement on our commitment to a £2,000 care leaver payment, and investment in prevention through whole family wellbeing.

In the past year, I have seen many great examples of transformational activity across Scotland in education, justice and children’s services. I have been clear that, where it is required, I want to see that best practice shared and replicated across Scotland.

The Scottish Government will publish a review of our Promise implementation plan this spring to update on the actions and commitments that are under way.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Last Friday was care day, which is the biggest celebration of care-experienced children around the world. However, a recent report by Who Cares? Scotland assigns at least amber, if not red, to some of the things that we are trying to achieve. There was an absence rate of 83 per cent among social workers in one local authority and concerns have been expressed about restraint, informal school exclusions and data. Scotland will keep the Promise, but when will Scotland see the illuminated path to achieving it in the time that we have promised?

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

I thank the member for that question. Equally, I am thankful for the Who Cares? Scotland report, which highlights the areas where further work is required.

We are determined to drive forward the transformational change that is required to keep the Promise. I fully believe that the actions that the Government has taken, is taking and will take will help us to achieve that.

As well as the areas that I have already mentioned, and specifically in relation to Mr Whitfield’s points, we are seeing clear progress across a number of areas, such as an increase in the number of virtual headteachers across Scotland, which is a model that is showing real progress in reducing exclusions. We have also seen the publication of the hearings system working group’s redesign report “Hearings for Children” and I am sure that the member will be aware of the Government’s response to that. We have also seen progress on data. I am willing to discuss any areas of concern with the member.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes general question time.

Before we move to First Minister’s question time, I invite members to join me in welcoming to the gallery Hanna Naber, President of the State Parliament of Lower Saxony. [

Applause

.]

National Health Service

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

1. This morning, Audit Scotland released a damning report on the state of Scotland’s NHS. It shows, among many shocking figures, that the number of people waiting more than a year for treatment has jumped from 3,500 to 40,000. That is an elevenfold increase since 2019, despite patient numbers falling.

When he was Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, Humza Yousaf brought in his NHS recovery plan, which was supposed to bring waiting times down. Why are things getting worse, not better?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

First and foremost, I say that we take very seriously the comments in the report by the Auditor General that was published this morning. There is simply no doubt about, and there are no attempts by us to downplay, the seriousness of the challenges that the health service is facing, as it recovers from what is undoubtedly the biggest shock of its 75-year existence—the global pandemic. There are challenges for every single health service right across the United Kingdom.

To answer Douglas Ross’s question directly, I say that we are still facing the cumulative impacts of the pandemic. For example, people are still, this winter, suffering from Covid. That has an impact not just on in-patient care in hospitals, but on the ability of staff to perform elective care treatments and surgeries. I accept, of course, that in NHS Scotland those challenges are my responsibility as well as that of the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care. However, they are common challenges right across the country.

Some of the latest data, from September last year, shows that in Scotland 123 patients per 1,000 of the population were waiting, outside the treatment time guarantee, for new out-patient appointments. That figure is smaller than the one for England, where there were 137 per 1,000 on the referral-to-treatment waiting list. In Wales, the figure is 245 per 1,000. My point is that Scotland’s NHS is facing challenges—of that, there is no doubt—but they are common challenges right across the UK.

We will make sure that we fund the NHS. That is why I am pleased that, in the budget that was announced by the Deputy First Minister last year, we invested a record £19.5 billion in our health service.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

This is an Audit Scotland report into NHS Scotland. Please, First Minister, focus on our NHS in Scotland.

The shocking elevenfold increase in people waiting over a year is, of course, against a target that should be zero. There was a target that, by March 2023, waits of over a year would be eradicated. Instead, the number of people waiting that long is now more than 40,000. Audit Scotland says that the latest Scottish National Party targets for reduced waiting times

“are unlikely to be met”.

They are Humza Yousaf’s targets. It was his recovery plan. When he was health secretary, he said that the plan will

“drive the recovery of our NHS, not just to its pre-pandemic level but beyond”.

That is yet another example of Humza Yousaf winging it.

That arrogant claim now rings hollow, and patients in Scotland are suffering. Humza Yousaf sent waiting times in the wrong direction. Will he now finally admit that his plan has failed?

The First Minister

Here is what we have managed to achieve—although I accept that there is still a way to go and, of course, I accept the recommendations of the Audit Scotland report. Because of the investment that we have made in national treatment centres, there have been an additional 20,000 procedures. There has been an 11 per cent increase in performed operations in the past 12 months. The number of out-patients waiting longer than two years has fallen by almost 70 per cent. The number of in-patient day-case patients waiting the longest times has fallen by more than 25 per cent. We are investing more than £19.5 billion—a record amount—in our national health service.

What makes the recovery more difficult is the 10 per cent cut to our capital budget, which means that we have less to spend on capital health infrastructure. What makes the job more difficult is our being given only £10.8 million of health consequentials in the UK Government’s autumn statement, which is enough for five hours of NHS activity. The Conservatives rightly ask questions about what more we can do, but this SNP Government will invest in our NHS, unlike Douglas Ross’s party, which is cutting funding to the bone.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It is not just the Conservatives who are asking these questions—it is Audit Scotland and, crucially, our constituents, who are suffering. As usual, however, Humza Yousaf promises the world but has delivered very little. It is just like the ferries that he claimed he would build, the hate crime act that he said would be a success and the trains that he promised he would get to run on time.

Audit Scotland says that it cannot even fully measure how badly the First Minister’s recovery plan has failed, because the SNP has not been transparent with the public.

Audit Scotland says that

“Updates against a range of the ambitions are absent”.

Humza Yousaf is covering up just how bad it has been, but the reason for the failure is clear from the report. Audit Scotland states that there is “no overall vision” for Scotland’s NHS. How can Humza Yousaf and the SNP Government have no vision for Scotland’s NHS?

The First Minister

We will respond to the Audit Scotland report in due course, but let me say to Douglas Ross—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Do it now.

The First Minister

Let me say to Douglas Ross that the SNP’s stewardship of the NHS includes record investment in our NHS of more than £19.5 billion, and resource funding being more than doubled—it has increased by more than 100 per cent since we have been in power. There is record staffing in our NHS of more than 31,300 whole-time equivalents. There are more nurses in Scotland per head of population than there are in England. We have the best NHS staff anywhere in the UK. We have had the best-performing accident and emergency departments not for one year, not for five years, but for eight consecutive years. Because we value our NHS staff, we are the only nation in the UK not to have had NHS staff go on strike.

When it comes to the challenges that our NHS is undoubtedly facing—and I am not downplaying them—the Government is ensuring that we invest in the recovery. The difference between the Tories and the SNP is that we will invest in our NHS, while the Conservatives are cutting it right to the bone.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

There is “no ... vision” for Scotland’s NHS. Those are not my words—they are the words of the Auditor General for Scotland. Audit Scotland makes it very clear that that lack of vision has not happened just because of the pandemic and the issues that our NHS has faced; there has not been a vision for Scotland’s NHS since 2013.

Audit Scotland says:

“There has been no unified vision for the future direction of the entire healthcare system published since 2013”.

Humza Yousaf has no vision for Scotland’s NHS. He has been asleep at the wheel, like every other SNP First Minister. There has been a lost decade of leadership in Scotland’s NHS, and 10 years of stalling and delay has had dire consequences for patients. How long are people in Scotland going to have to wait for the SNP to get its act together?

The First Minister

We are

investing in that recovery now. That is why, for example, the number of out-patients waiting the longest has reduced by almost 70 per cent, and why the number of in-patients waiting the longest has reduced by more than 25 per cent. [

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross!

The First Minister

That is why the number of operations performed in the past 12 months was an increase of 11 per cent. That is why, through our investment, we have created additional capacity for 20,000 procedures. That is why we are investing a record £19.5 billion in our NHS, despite the fact that the UK Government, in its autumn statement—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

—provided less than £11 million for NHS health consequentials. That is enough to fund five hours of NHS activity.

I will take not a single lecture from Douglas Ross about investing in our NHS, when his party is responsible for a 10 per cent capital cut in our budget, which is impacting our health infrastructure deeply. I am afraid that Douglas Ross is presiding over a party that has taken a hatchet to our public services. While his party has cut our public services to the bone, we will continue to invest in the most precious institution in this country—our national health service.

Oil and Gas Industry (Profits)

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

2. We are in the middle of a cost of living crisis in which too many people are struggling to make ends meet. At the same time, oil and gas giants are making record profits. British Gas had a tenfold increase in profits in one year, making more than £700 million. BP has made a profit of £11 billion. Profit at TotalEnergies is £16 billion, and at Shell is £22 billion. Why does the First Minister think that those companies cannot afford to pay more tax?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

A

week after

The Press and Journal

put Anas Sarwar’s face on its front page, with his Labour colleagues, and called him a traitor to the north-east, it is incredibly brave of him to come here and say that he is standing up for the north-east. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

I travelled to the north-east this week and heard the palpable anger from the oil and gas and renewable energy sectors and industries. They spoke about Anas Sarwar’s plans and those of the Labour Party, which would—in the industry’s words, not mine—risk up to 100,000 jobs in the north-east. How does Anas Sarwar think that, in the midst of a cost of living crisis, throwing 100,000 workers on the scrap heap will help households up and down the country?

We absolutely believe in a windfall tax on energy companies. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Members, let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

What we do not believe in is Anas Sarwar’s and Labour’s aggressive plans to raid the north-east so that they can build new nuclear power plants in England. We will not allow that. We will not stand for it. We will stand up for the north-east. Anas Sarwar cannot even stand up to Keir Starmer.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Presiding Officer—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

E

very time that Labour has proposed a change to help working people, the warnings that have been made have not come true. In 1997, when Labour proposed a minimum wage and a windfall tax, it was warned that that would cost 2 million jobs. That did not happen. It improved the lives of working people across the country.

Humza Yousaf used to support Labour’s windfall tax, but now he is siding with energy giants, which are making record profits, while he is putting up tax for working people across this country who are struggling. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

While Shell has brought in £22 billion in profit, energy bills have increased by 60 per cent and people are struggling to heat their homes. While BP makes £11 billion in profit, food prices are up by 25 per cent and people are struggling to put food on the table. While British Gas sees a tenfold increase in its profits, mortgages have increased by £2,000 a year and families risk losing their homes. Why does the Scottish National Party believe that someone who earns £28,500 has the broadest shoulders and should pay more tax, but that an energy giant that is making billions of pounds in profit should pay less tax?

The First Minister

Imagine taking a lecture about standing up for those on the lowest incomes from the man who has flip-flopped on his position and now believes in lifting the cap on bankers’ bonuses. Wow—who would have thought it? Labour is now the party of the few, not the party of the many.

It is astonishing that Anas Sarwar has stood up in the chamber and called the energy industry liars. That is what he has done. Well, let me say what Offshore Energies UK has said. It claims that Labour’s proposals would result in the loss of up to 42,000 jobs and North Sea investment being “wiped out”. Investment bank Stifel has said that, under a “worst-case scenario”, Labour’s proposals would wipe out up to 100,000 jobs and put them on the scrap heap.

With Labour’s energy proposals, we would get the worst of both worlds. All the investment in oil and gas, which has been good for Scotland over the decades, would be completely wiped out. Then what does Keir Starmer do? He dumps his £28 billion a year green prosperity fund.

Scotland’s energy should be in Scotland’s hands, because successive Westminster Governments have raided the north-east, Aberdeen and our oil and gas revenues, and not a single penny has been invested back into the people of Aberdeen and the north-east. For that, Anas Sarwar should stand up and apologise.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I cannot wait to present the choice at the next general election between the SNP and the Labour Party. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Sorry, Mr Sarwar. Let us ensure that we can all hear one another.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I

cannot wait to present the choice to the Scottish people, come the next general election, because the SNP is firmly on the side of energy giants making billions of pounds, whereas Labour is trying to bring down people’s bills and is on the side of working people.

Let us be clear about what Labour’s windfall tax on the record profits of energy giants will be spent on. It will mean more jobs, lower bills, greater energy security and the delivery of a just transition for Scotland. It will mean investment in GB energy—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

—a publicly owned energy generation company that will be headquartered here, in Scotland. It will mean investment in our ports, onshore wind, offshore wind, green hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, and strengthening our supply chains. It will mean creating 50,000 new jobs in Scotland.

Is it not the case that the Scottish people have a choice: the SNP, which is increasing tax on working people while siding with the oil and gas giants, or Labour, which will create jobs, bring down bills and be firmly on the side of working people?

The First Minister

I remind Anas Sarwar that he talks about people in the midst of a cost of living crisis, but he has now flip-flopped his way to a position in which he believes in retaining the cap on child benefits but wants to lift the cap on bankers’ bonuses. That is utterly outrageous.

I was in Aberdeen earlier this week, and I now cannot wait to go head to head with Anas Sarwar in Aberdeen during the general election. In fact, he can debate the oil and gas industry and renewables with me in Aberdeen any and every day of the week.

Anas Sarwar claims that an incoming Labour Government will make all sorts of investments—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

First Minister, will you just give me a moment?

The First Minister

Oh, they do not like it, Presiding Officer. They do not like it one single bit.

The Presiding Officer

First Minister, just give me a moment. Let us ensure that we carry on with our proceedings with courtesy and respect. Let us ensure that we can hear one another.

The First Minister

Anas Sarwar claims that there will be a range and raft of investment from an incoming Labour Government. Of course, what is obvious is that the branch manager did not get the memo that the £28 billion has been dumped, so not a single penny of that investment will be coming to Scotland.

Successive United Kingdom Governments have taken £400 billion, in today’s prices, in oil and gas revenue, raiding the North Sea as a cash cow without investing a fraction of it back in the north-east and Aberdeen. With Anas Sarwar’s plans, we would end up with 100,000 workers on the scrap heap and no investment in our net zero ambitions. Is it not about time that Scotland’s energy is in Scotland’s hands?

The Presiding Officer

Question 3—Maggie Chapman. [

Interruption

.] Let us hear Ms Chapman.

Taxation Policy

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

3. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether successive changes to national taxation policy in Scottish budgets will support the redistribution of wealth and help sustain vital public services. (S6F-02825)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

In short, yes, they will. Our changes

to income tax in Scotland have made it more progressive. That approach means that we have an additional £1.5 billion from income tax to invest in 2024-25 compared with what we would have had if we had matched United Kingdom Government policy, which Douglas Ross advocated at the time. That £1.5 billion is being invested in public services in an effort to offset the huge impact that Westminster austerity has had on the availability of public spending. If we had further powers, such as those that are needed to tax wealth effectively, we could do so much more to build on our progressive tax system and, of course, further protect public services in Scotland.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

We all have too many constituents who are struggling with grinding poverty, for whom public services are a lifeline. I am proud that tax changes that the Scottish Greens have championed—tax changes that mean that the better-off pay more and the people on lower incomes pay less—mean that £1.5 billion more is available for those services. Politicians who promise tax cuts must be honest about what services they would cut.

The Scottish Trades Union Congress has argued—and the First Minister has just recognised—that Scotland can and should do more to use tax powers to redistribute wealth and to make the case that taxation is a public good. How does the First Minister plan to build that consensus for progressive taxation as a force for good?

The First Minister

As I have said,

the Government is absolutely committed to progressive taxation. I thank the STUC and others for the contribution that they have made. The Deputy First Minister engaged with a number of stakeholders in relation to our progressive taxation plans, and we will continue to have such engagement with stakeholders, including the business community and the people of Scotland, on our progressive taxation plans. Poll after poll tells us that the public support public service investment that is backed by progressive taxation.

Douglas Ross stood up in the chamber and urged the Scottish Government to follow the disastrous Liz Truss budget. He needs to have the humility to say how wrong he was. When Anas Sarwar says that he will cut taxes for the highest earners, he needs to be honest about what public services he will cut. In the round, his tax plans will reduce revenue by £561 million. Will that mean that he will scrap the Scottish child payment, free prescriptions and free bus travel, or will it mean, as his finance spokesperson hinted just this week, that he will end up scrapping free university education?

We will continue our commitment to progressive taxation and to the social contract in Scotland, which provides that there are no tuition fees for higher education, and which provides widespread access to bus services, free prescriptions and a host of other benefits. Of course, we will seek common cause with others, such as the STUC, who believe in progressive taxation.

Colin Beattie (Scottish National Party, Midlothian North and Musselburgh)

The Scottish National Party Scottish Government’s progressive tax plans help to deliver a strong social contract and to ensure that additional targeted funding is available to protect people and our vital public services. Meanwhile, Scottish Labour’s priorities appear to be elsewhere. Last weekend, it seemed to indicate that it now supports cutting income tax. Can the First Minister provide an update on what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the impact that that could have on Scotland’s public finances and the Scottish Government’s ability to fund public services?

The First Minister

We know that, if we had followed the Conservatives’ budget proposals, we would have had £1.5 billion less to spend. We know that, as a result of Anas Sarwar’s tax policies, in the round, there would be about £561 million less to spend on investing in our national health service, education, justice services and social security.

Anas Sarwar has made the point that people who earn, for example, £30,000 pay more in Scotland. They pay 94p a month more and, for that, they get free university education and the most generous childcare offer anywhere in the UK, they do not have to pay a single penny for their medicines, and they get free personal and nursing care and a range of other benefits. That is why poll after poll shows that the public are supportive of progressive taxation if it is used in the way that we are using it, to invest in our public services.

If Labour wants to continue to offer people such as Anas Sarwar a huge tax cut, which would end up reducing the revenue that we had to spend on public services, it must have the honesty to say what public services it would cut.

Addressing Depopulation Action Plan

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

4. To ask the First Minister, regarding the delivery of the Scottish Government’s recently published depopulation action plan, what will be different about this approach, which is described as “local by default, national by agreement”, particularly towards the approval of new developments supported by local communities. (S6F-02848)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The addressing depopulation action plan sets out the Scottish Government’s strategic approach, which aims to support local communities that are facing population decline. I know that the member has a significant interest in that issue, which is set against the devastating impact that a hard Brexit is having on our rural and island communities.

On the question of the new things that the plan will do, it will deliver a programme of work to support and empower affected areas through funding new research and enhanced partnership working with those communities.

As Fergus Ewing has said, we acknowledge the importance of local leadership and the fact that communities are best placed to respond to their own challenges.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

To have young people leaving Scotland for other countries for their lifetime and for ever has been our tragedy and our shame. Therefore, will the First Minister now agree that, where there is a chronic depopulation problem, economic developments that would bring jobs and major community benefits will henceforth be treated as developments of national economic significance?

The First Minister

I am more than happy to look at that proposal. When planning applications are called into the Scottish Government, a range of factors is considered, including the impact on the natural environment and the economic impact. I will not comment on any specific, live application, but Fergus Ewing is right to say that, if we want to retain our young people, we must ensure that we create economic opportunities, invest in housing—as we are doing through our affordable housing supply programme in rural communities—and invest in connectivity, as we are also doing.

Fergus Ewing makes some important points, but what is undoubtedly devastating our rural communities is the damage that has been caused by a hard Brexit that was foisted on Scotland against its will.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Housing is mentioned 114 times in the depopulation action plan, yet Homes for Scotland was not consulted on the plan, nor even made aware of it, despite being an adviser on housing to 2040.

Does the First Minister accept that the failure to properly consult the sector on the plan is a huge misstep? What action will he take to rectify that?

The First Minister

We engage regularly with stakeholders. If there has been an omission, we are more than happy to look at that and I will ask the appropriate minister to do so.

I go back to the point that I made in my response to Fergus Ewing. Housing is essential in attracting people to rural and island communities and to retaining them. We published our rural and islands housing action plan in October last year and it sets out the wide range of action that we are taking to support the rural and island population. That includes continued investment in affordable housing, with 10 per cent of affordable houses being in rural and island communities.

Our rural and island housing fund provides continued support to communities to bring forward housing where they wish to do so. Over the next five years, up to £25 million from the affordable housing budget will be used to support housing for key workers and there is a range of other action. I am happy for the housing minister to write to Pam Gosal to give her confidence that we take the issue of housing in our rural and island communities seriously.

Oil and Gas Licences

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government still has a policy of a presumption against any new oil and gas licences. (S6F-02845)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Oil and gas continue to play an important part in Scotland’s energy transition. Our focus is on meeting our energy security needs, reducing emissions in line with our climate goals and ensuring a just transition for the workforce as North Sea oil and gas resources inevitably decline.

As part of that approach, our draft energy strategy and our just transition plan consulted on a presumption against the licensing of new exploration for oil and gas. We have never proposed having no new licensing at all, but, unlike the Conservatives, we are not ignoring the scale of the climate crisis befalling our planet. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Mr Sarwar!

The First Minister

We will work with the energy industry to accelerate the transition to net zero where we can.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The First Minister makes one trip up to Aberdeen and then masquerades as the saviour of the oil and gas industry. He must think that the people of the north-east are buttoned up the back. He is against Cambo and Rosebank, and his Government still has a presumption against any new oil and gas licences. Will the First Minister tell members why he is in favour of importing more oil and gas and stopping new investment, which, as he knows, means throwing away thousands of livelihoods on the scrap heap?

The First Minister

If Douglas Lumsden knew what he was talking about, he would know that the vast majority of the oil that is extracted from the North Sea gets exported overseas. What is clear to me, to the people of Scotland and to the people of the north-east is that Westminster is not working for Scotland. For decades, the Conservatives have been telling the people of Scotland that Scotland’s oil is running out. Now, all of a sudden, they are pretending that it is going to last forever. [

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear the First Minister.

The First Minister

Successive United Kingdom Governments, Tory and Labour, have used the north-east as a cash cow, squandering £400 billion in today’s prices of oil and gas revenue. Whether it is the Conservatives or Labour, whose policies could end up throwing 100,000 workers on the scrap heap, Westminster cannot be trusted with Scotland’s natural resources. It is high time that Scotland’s energy was in Scotland’s hands, so that we can ensure cheaper bills, unleash the economic potential of the green revolution and, of course, help tackle the climate crisis.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I welcome the First Minister’s visit to Aberdeen this week and the engagement that he has had with the oil and gas sector. Will that engagement with the oil and gas sector continue—[

Laughter

.]

The Presiding Officer

Let us hear Mr Stewart.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I

n particular, will engagement continue regarding retaining and increasing the vital investment that is needed to deliver a just transition, following the deeply concerning warnings that Labour’s aggressive plans for the North Sea will put 100,000 jobs at risk? That is really serious for my constituents in Aberdeen, the north-east and beyond.

The First Minister

Many of those in the north-east of Scotland will just have seen Kevin Stewart rightly standing up for his constituents, using not Scottish Government figures but industry figures that say that Labour’s plans could risk up to 100,000 jobs, and they will have heard Labour laughing—laughing at Kevin Stewart, laughing at the people of Aberdeen and laughing at our oil and gas workers, who, of course, have done an incredible job for Scotland over decades and continue to do an excellent job for Scotland.

Let me reiterate what I have already said in previous exchanges, which is that we in the Scottish National Party support a windfall tax—of that, there is no doubt. What we do not support is aggressive plans by Labour not just to increase that windfall tax but to raid the north-east so that it can pay for new nuclear power plants in England. That is unfair and not acceptable.

We believe that, as we accelerate the transition to net zero, the oil and gas workers, who are incredibly skilled and have incredible expertise, will be absolutely vital to that just transition. I can promise them that, as long as the SNP is in government, we will protect them from the damaging plans of Keir Starmer and Labour, which would end up seeing them thrown on the scrap heap.

Mental Health Problems (Household Debt)

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the analysis by Citizens Advice Scotland suggesting that over 660,000 people are experiencing mental health problems due to increasing household debt. (S6F-02847)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

The Scottish Government remains deeply concerned about the impact of the cost of living crisis, especially on those who are already struggling with poor mental health and money worries. We know that that is leading to far more people seeking advice and support, which is why we support free welfare debt and income maximisation advice services, with funding of more than £12.5 million allocated this year.

Mental health remains a priority, and we have supported overall increases to mental health spend over the years. Through our 2024-25 budget, the Scottish Government and national health service boards will continue to spend in excess of £1.3 billion for mental health. More widely, recognising the pressures on household budgets since 2022-23, we continue to allocate around £3 billion a year to policies that tackle poverty and protect people, as far as we possibly can, during the on-going cost of living crisis.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Increasingly, people have nowhere to turn when their mental health deteriorates. Patients in some health boards have been waiting for more than 1,000 days to start psychological therapy, and one in four consultant psychiatry positions is vacant. The Government’s response is to cut £30 million more from the mental health budget, despite its already being £180 million adrift from the target. When will the First Minister’s Government start to take the crisis in mental health seriously and reverse the proposed cut to mental health funding in the budget?

The First Minister

Let me correct Paul Sweeney on some issues in relation to our funding. We have a good track record on spending on mental health, in the face of 14 years of austerity. Under the Scottish National Party, mental health spending by NHS Scotland has doubled in cash terms, from £651 million in 2006-07 to £1.3 billion in 2021-22—up by almost 100 per cent. Expenditure on child and adolescent mental health services rose from £88 million in 2020-21 to £97.6 million in 2021-22. Of course we have had challenges in the budget that we have just announced, but we have ensured that we are doing what we can to invest in mental health.

Paul Sweeney was right to reference the Citizens Advice Scotland report. The cost of living crisis is undoubtedly a source of deep mental anguish for too many households up and down the country, and we will therefore continue to invest in mental health.

What is worrying is that Paul Sweeney’s party believes in, for example, retaining the two-child limit. The person who is likely to be the next chancellor of the United Kingdom has promised to be “tougher” than the Tories on benefits. Through our actions, we lifted an estimated 90,000 children out of poverty last year. The Scottish Government will invest in helping people with debt and in reducing the cost of living, but how much better would it be if we did not have to continue to mitigate the worst excesses and harm of Westminster but instead took all the decisions about Scotland here in Scotland?

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

Will the First Minister outline how increased funding—for example, on discretionary housing payments, which impact on mental health issues in Scotland—will help make up for the chronically insufficient UK housing benefits funding? Will he also outline how we in Scotland can maximise support for low-income households?

The First Minister

Willie Coffey makes an exceptionally important point. The damage done by the UK Government’s three-year freeze to local housing allowance has been considerable, with an estimated £819 million lost. That, coupled with the cruel bedroom tax policy, is undoubtedly causing great harm.

Although the Labour Party is failing to offer any change to those devastating policies, the Scottish Government will take action. We are investing an additional £6 million in discretionary housing payments, bringing the total for mitigating all of those cuts to more than £90 million. That is helping more than 90,000 low-income households pay their rent and keep their homes.

The Presiding Officer

We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.

Henry Wuga

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Will the First Minister join me in offering congratulations to my constituent Henry Wuga? Henry escaped the Nazi Holocaust, travelling from Nuremberg to Glasgow in 1939 at the age of 15. Here, he met his wife, Ingrid, who was also a survivor as a consequence of the Kindertransport and events that were celebrated in the film “One Life”, starring Sir Anthony Hopkins.

Tomorrow, Henry turns 100 years of age. He has made a remarkable contribution to this country. I have lodged a motion that is supported by Paul O’Kane, and Kirsten Oswald MP is tabling a similar motion in the House of Commons. Will the First Minister join me and, I hope, the chamber, in offering Henry Wuga many happy returns? [

Applause

.]

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Yes.

I wish Henry Wuga a very happy 100th birthday; indeed, I have written to him to pass on my personal congratulations.

Jackson Carlaw is right. Henry Wuga is an absolute inspiration. Just weeks ago, Jackson Carlaw, many other members in the chamber and I commemorated Holocaust memorial day. We heard very powerful testimony from a number of those who were either survivors or families of survivors of the Holocaust and other genocides.

The work that Henry has done over the decades to remind and inform people of the horrors of the Holocaust—which should never ever be forgotten by any of us—is truly an inspiration for each and every person in this country.

I pass on my congratulations and best wishes for Henry’s birthday, and I put on record my, the Scottish Government’s, and the whole country’s appreciation for the incredible work that he has done. In particular, he has reminded us of the horrors of the Holocaust and said that we should never ever forget them, that we should reflect on them and, of course, that wherever we see violence or discrimination—be it here at home or abroad—we should work together to ensure that we see peace right across the world. [

Applause

.]

Audit Scotland Report “NHS in Scotland 2023”

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Scotland’s national health service is directionless, risking patient safety and on the brink of breakdown. Those are not my words—that is Audit Scotland’s assessment of the NHS under the Scottish National Party.

In a devastating critique of the Government, it points to a health service at breaking point, with extreme overcrowding and long waiting times threatening patient safety. It accuses the SNP Government of having no vision and calls for fundamental reform.

The need for leadership is clear, but leadership is absent. After 17 years of decline under the SNP, what reforms will the First Minister bring forward to save our NHS?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

We will bring forward reforms, which the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care will detail.

We will work with staff to see what we can do and what more we can invest in the preventative space in particular, so that individuals do not have to go to secondary or primary care—particularly not to secondary care, when we know that there is intense pressure on our hospital sites up and down the country.

Let me remind Jackie Baillie that, after 17 years, we have record staffing, record investment and the best-paid staff in the NHS. We are the only country in the entire United Kingdom that has not lost a single day to strike action. I stand to be corrected, but I think that there are junior doctor strikes in Labour-run NHS Wales today.

We will continue to invest in our NHS and, most importantly, in the people who run it—our nurses, doctors and all the NHS agenda for change staff, who do an incredible job. We promise to continue to work with them for the best possible outcomes for patients across Scotland.

War in Ukraine

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

This Saturday will mark two years to the day that Russia launched an unprovoked, brutal and illegal invasion of Ukraine.

Putin’s conflict rages on. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians have been killed and maimed, with vast areas of Ukraine and many of its towns and cities devastated, and millions displaced. Scotland opened its doors and hearts to Ukrainian refugees, but the war also caused energy price rises and economic shocks.

What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact of the on-going war against Ukraine on households affected by poverty and the cost of living crisis?

What message of solidarity will the First Minister send to the Ukrainian people, particularly the 26,000 who now call Scotland home?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I am grateful to Kenneth Gibson for raising this remarkably important issue. I will be joining others across the chamber on Saturday to commemorate and reflect on the two-year illegal invasion by Russia of Ukraine, which we condemn in the strongest possible manner.

We continue to be shocked and appalled at the violence and the humanitarian crisis that continues to unfold in Ukraine—again, because of Russia’s illegal actions.

Scotland stands by Ukraine. We stand for democracy, human rights and the rule of law, at home and abroad. We offer our unqualified support for Ukrainian sovereignty and we wish a speedy victory for Ukraine and a resolution that not only restores peace but ensures Ukrainian sovereignty, democracy, independence and territorial integrity.

Since the war against Ukraine began, more than 26,600 people sponsored by an individual in Scotland or by the Scottish Government have arrived in the United Kingdom—that is as of 22 February this year.

I am proud of how the people of Scotland have responded to this humanitarian crisis. I am grateful to all those who have opened their homes and hearts to displaced Ukrainians who are fleeing the war.

For as long as those who have fled the war and come to Scotland want to call Scotland their home, they will always be given the warmest welcome possible. [

Applause

.]

Bail Orders (Independent Review)

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The parents of Claire Inglis have spent more than two years desperately trying to get answers. Ian and Fiona still do not know why Claire’s killer was subject to five separate bail orders. They have now discovered that social workers tried to warn Claire about her violent new partner, but no one answered the door. Seventy-two hours later, she was killed. A council review failed to answer critical questions. I am not putting the First Minister on the spot by asking this question, which is not about party politics; it is about violence against women. I urge him to look again at Ian and Fiona’s request for a thorough independent review of the case.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

I will genuinely look at that request again and consider what further independent review of the case could be made. I completely understand the deep sense of grief and anger that Ian and Fiona Inglis feel.

Russell Findlay will know that I wrote to the Lord President and the Lord Advocate on the issue. I passed their responses to Mr Findlay earlier. Many of the decisions that were taken at the time would have been for the independent judiciary to determine.

On the questions on and potential failures in local authority action that Ian and Fiona Inglis have articulated, I will consider what Russell Findlay has asked me to do, and what more we are able to do. If we can do anything further as far as an independent review is concerned, I will revert to Mr Findlay directly.

Violence in Schools

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

This week, teachers in Aberdeen told the BBC that they were scared to go to work because of rising in violence in schools. The Educational Institute of Scotland’s recent survey found that almost 40 per cent of teachers in the city had been physically assaulted by a pupil. Those statistics should shock us all. They demand action from a Government that has taken its eye off the ball and allowed this problem to grow and grow. Scottish Labour is clear that we must take a zero-tolerance approach to violence in our schools. Exactly how much violence is the First Minister prepared to tolerate before he acts?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Most people will see that Michael Marra is choosing to politicise the issue in a partisan way, as he always does. His suggestion that having a slogan about zero tolerance will suddenly make the issue better represents a complete failure of credibility on his part.

We are working with the teaching profession, because teachers up and down the country have raised very serious issues, which we take extremely seriously. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has hosted a number of summits, with educational professionals and teachers, in particular, to consider what more we can do.

As Michael Marra will probably know, we also commissioned behaviour in Scottish schools research to establish the true picture on national evidence of teachers’ and support staff’s experiences of behaviour in publicly funded mainstream schools. Although the results of the 2023 research highlighted that most children and young people are well behaved in class in schools, they also tell us about the level of disruption that exists. That is clearly not good enough.

We are working with our partners in local government to introduce a joint national action plan to drive improvements. I will ensure that Michael Marra is kept up to date on that.

Points of Order

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

On a p

oint of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your advice under chapter 9 of standing orders, following today’s publication of the stage 1 report on the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill.

A few weeks ago, members agreed that the stage 1 debate should take place next Thursday. Members will know of my long-standing commitment to the establishment of a national care service. Indeed, it is more than a decade since I first proposed it, so what is currently happening troubles me immensely. I therefore seek your advice on two counts.

First, the conclusion of the report seems manifestly contrary to so much of the report’s contents. Page after page of criticism appears to have been ignored. It also appears that evidence given by the third sector, independent providers and those with lived experience has also been ignored. [

Interruption

.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the member.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The party whip has been imposed to get the bill over the line.

Secondly, there is a question about the integrity of the Parliament’s processes. Let me explain. Substantial changes are being made to the bill following a deal between the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Scottish Government. No evidence has been taken on that as it came too late in the process. It radically changes the governance of a national care service, and this has caused—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

I would be very grateful if we could hear the member.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

That has caused—[

Interruption

.]

The Presiding Officer

The reason that I am asking is that I cannot address a comment, contribution or point of order if I cannot hear it.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

That has caused considerable disquiet in the care sector. Education, Children and Young People Committee members of all political stripes have been trying to get the Scottish Government to lodge its amendments so that they can be subject to scrutiny before stage 2 starts. They have written to and spoken to the minister, but the Government says no. One of the committee members even sought agreement to share the target operating model, which would have provided a direction of travel for the amendments. That, too, was refused.

I am concerned that the Government does not yet have any amendments. Otherwise, why would it refuse to share them with the committee so that members can do their job and scrutinise them properly?

There are unfortunate examples in the Parliament of a perception that a committee did not do its job in scrutinising legislation. We should not let that happen again, as the integrity of the Parliament is also at stake. Presiding Officer, can you advise whether there is an opportunity for the committee to reconsider its report in light of the arguments that I have made, and what would be the appropriate vehicle for achieving that?

The Presiding Officer

It is fair to say that I did not pick up all of the member’s comments, so I will refer to them and refer back, if required. However, I can confirm to the member that, under the rule that she refers to—9.6.1—any member may, by motion, propose that the bill be referred back to the lead committee for a further report on the general principles of the bill or on any particular part of it before the Parliament decides whether to agree to it.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

I seek your guidance on the appropriate conduct of members of the Parliament and your powers to safeguard members of the public, our staff and visitors in general to be able to enter and leave the Parliament. Last night, members of the public who were seeking to enter the Parliament were obstructed and intimidated—and all of that was orchestrated and trumpeted by a member of the Parliament: a Scottish Green MSP.

It is surely unacceptable conduct for a member of the Scottish Parliament to seek to prevent members of the public from entering their own Parliament, so I ask for your guidance on the following. In light of last night’s events, what actions will be taken to secure safe access for the public to enter their Parliament at all times? What action will be taken against the member, who I believe has brought disrepute to the Scottish Parliament? Not only did he plan and conduct the obstruction and the demonstration, but he claimed responsibility for it. He sought to shut down the Parliament.

We all believe in freedom of speech and the right to protest, but the right of the people of Scotland to come safely and securely into their Parliament and to leave it when they choose to do so must also be safeguarded.

The Presiding Officer

I am not aware of all the circumstances to which Mr Kerr refers, but it is absolutely clear, I am sure, to all of us that the security of all building users and our guests is paramount. I can confirm that I am aware that there were extremely difficult circumstances last evening and that all our scheduled events were able to proceed. I am certainly grateful to our staff and police colleagues who made that possible. I assure all members that our procedures are very much kept under review, and they are adjusted where that is appropriate.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Further to that point of order, I trust—and I hope that we can all trust—that, in your consideration of these issues, you will give a high priority to the absolutely essential role that the right to peaceful protest plays in our democracy and in the life of our Parliament.

The Presiding Officer

I have commented on the points that have been raised. I am absolutely sure that all members here assembled understand the importance of the right to protest and the importance that we place on the rights of all building users and staff to use the building securely and safely.

That ends this item of business. I will suspend the meeting before we move on to members’ business. I will allow a moment for the galleries and the chamber to clear.

12:54 Meeting suspended.

12:55 On resuming—

Palestine and Israel

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-12177, in the name of Ivan McKee, on an immediate ceasefire in Palestine and Israel. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes with concern reports of the recent upsurge in violence in Palestine and Israel, which, it understands, has seen more than 28,000 people, including mostly women and children, killed by Israeli forces in Gaza, 1,400 people killed by Hamas and other terrorist organisations in Israel, and more than 300 Palestinian civilians killed by Israeli armed settlers in the West Bank; believes strongly that there is no justification for inflicting terror or killing innocent civilians, or for the taking of civilian hostages, and condemns violence in all its forms; notes with concern what it considers to be the risk of disease and malnutrition in Gaza as a consequence of the Israeli blockade of the strip, which, it believes, may itself constitute a breach of international law; recognises what it sees as the critically important relief work of organisations such as the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) and Medical Aid for Palestinians, and notes that the UK Government and others are being urged to continue to financially support this work; considers that this conflict did not begin on 7 October 2023, and notes the belief that a lasting peace with justice will only come through a negotiated settlement; notes the calls for an immediate ceasefire in Palestine and Israel to allow diplomatic discussions to take place that will safeguard innocent civilians; further notes the reported ruling by the International Court of Justice and the view that there may be a case to answer that the actions of Israel in Gaza constitute genocide against the Palestinian people; commends the work of Israeli human rights organisations, including B’Tselem and Breaking the Silence, which, it considers, continue to make the case for a lasting and just peace in what it sees as these horrific times; notes the calls on the UK Government, including from communities in the Glasgow Provan constituency, to do its part in working with other UN nations to demand an end to deadly military action in Gaza and settler violence in the West Bank, and to bring to justice those responsible for terror attacks and any who may be guilty of war crimes or incitement to genocide, and further notes the calls on the UK Government to recognise the State of Palestine.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

It gives me no pleasure to open the debate. I would much rather be celebrating the creation of a Palestinian state, or a state of Israel and Palestine that allows all the people between the river and the sea to live in peace, justice and equality. Tragically, that is not the position that we are in.

The latest conflict in Israel and Palestine has claimed the lives of more than 30,000 people since October of last year, the majority of whom are women and children, and the vast majority in the Gaza strip. The conditions in Gaza, as reported by Oxfam and others, are horrendous: there is disease, malnutrition and the destruction of health services and living accommodation. As members of the Scottish Parliament, we debate—rightly—the health and housing challenges that we face in this country, but we should spare a thought for the horrific conditions in Gaza at this very moment. The work of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and others in doing what they can to mitigate those conditions is increasingly difficult, and needed more than ever. Continued funding for that work is essential.

The conflict did not start on 7 October; it has been on-going for more than 75 years. This is the 15th Israeli military invasion of the Gaza strip since 1948, with the most recent in 2008 and 2014. The Gaza strip has been under siege since 2007. The Israeli Defence Forces’ Dahiya doctrine, as described to us by members of Breaking the Silence, which is the organisation of former IDF service members who are dedicated to highlighting human rights abuses, is based on the principle that there will be no end to the conflict. Therefore, a major strategic objective of any military operation is to deliver as much destruction to civilian infrastructure as possible so that the next, inevitable clashes are delayed for as long as possible.

The slaughter in Gaza committed by the Netanyahu regime has now claimed as many victims as Putin’s flattening of Grozny in the first Chechen war, or the Assad regime’s siege of Aleppo. There is no case for a delay in calling for a ceasefire. Tens of thousands have died as politicians in the west have prevaricated over semantics. Now is a time for clarity and bravery. The United Kingdom Government has weight and influence in the international community. The Netanyahu regime operates as it does because it perceives there to be a green light from the international community.

Some countries have taken their responsibility seriously. I commend the Government of South Africa—a country with its own experience of apartheid—for taking a case to the International Court of Justice. An initial ruling of that court indicates that there may be a case to answer that the actions of Israel in Gaza constitute genocide against the Palestinian people. Incitement to genocide is also a crime. It is not hard to find potential examples. There has been talk of flattening Gaza, turning it into rubble, eliminating everything and making it a place where no human can exist, creating a humanitarian crisis and removing all restrictions on the actions of soldiers. There have been calls for collective punishment, which is itself a war crime, and depriving civilian populations of food, water, electricity and healthcare. That is not the rhetoric of some fringe figures, but the words of the leadership of the Israeli Government and the IDF.

Unfortunately, it is a tragic and recurring theme of the human condition that it is easier to be honest about events in hindsight than to recognise them for what they are as they unfold. We now recognise the events in Bosnia in the 1990s as a genocide. That was not the case when—I remember it very well—the Major Government prevaricated for years, with Douglas Hurd working to prevent defence and protective equipment being delivered to the defenders of Sarajevo. The massacre in Srebrenica brought about the downfall of the Dutch Government, but not until some years later. The actions of the Government of France, as the ex-colonial power, represented at best acquiescence, and possibly complicity, in the now-recognised genocide in Rwanda.

I raise those examples because they provide a lesson to those who play politics with the slaughter in Gaza—who delay, prevaricate and triangulate, waiting for others to make the first move to give them political cover. That is the Augustinian approach to ending atrocities: please, Lord, stop this slaughter, but not just yet.

Let us not forget what is happening in the west bank, which I visited in 2018: land theft continues; Palestinian rights continue to be eroded; and deaths of Palestinian civilians have soared to more than 300 in the current period. The reality, of course, is that there can be no military or security solution to the problems of the region. After nearly five months of bombardment of Gaza, the fighting continues, the tunnels are still there, the IDF continues to take casualties, Hamas continues to function, and the hostages have still not, for the most part, been found or freed. Indeed, the IDF has perhaps managed to shoot more hostages than it has liberated.

Voices in Israel recognise that. We all want to see the release of hostages, and the quickest way to do that is through an immediate ceasefire and negotiations. Indeed, the only significant release of hostages came about through the brief ceasefire in November last year. Those negotiations must also lead to the recognition of a Palestinian state, which I believe is now the United Kingdom Labour Party’s position. If Keir Starmer becomes the next Prime Minister, I hope to see that promise delivered without delay, and not abandoned, as has been the case with other commitments. I know that there are many good colleagues in the Labour Party who will work to make that a reality.

The motion also recognises the many Israeli and Jewish voices that condemn the actions of the Netanyahu regime, recognising that it not only makes the lives of Palestinians hell, but prolongs the conflict and makes Israelis less safe too. Those voices include Breaking the Silence, the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem and many others. I have attended and spoken at rallies, calling for a ceasefire, and I have been heartened and encouraged by the number of Jewish voices present and speaking at those events.

I leave the last words to Jewish voices of the past that resonate today. From the leader of the Warsaw ghetto uprising, Marek Edelman:

“To be a Jew means always being with the oppressed, and never the oppressors”.

From Dutch Holocaust survivor Hajo Meyer, talking about the situation in Palestine:

“Never again, for anyone”.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am aware that many members wish to participate in the debate. I am, therefore, minded to accept a motion without notice, under rule 8.14.3, to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I invite Mr McKee to move the motion.

Motion moved,

That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[

Ivan McKee

]

Motion agreed to.

We are, nevertheless, under extreme time pressure. Afternoon business is due to start at 2 o’clock, and staff will need to come in to prepare the chamber, so I propose to conclude the debate at 10 minutes to 2, at the latest. I intend to ensure that all members who wish to speak have a chance to participate, but they will have to stick to their time, and members who speak towards the end of the debate may have to truncate their remarks even further.

On that note, I call Jackson Carlaw, to be followed by Neil Bibby. You have up to four minutes, Mr Carlaw.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I note the opportunity that is afforded by Ivan McKee, in lodging his motion, for members to discuss further this really troubling and horrendous international situation.

First, I pay tribute, as I have done previously, to the many interfaith organisations in Scotland that are working around the clock, every day, to do all that they can to maintain cohesive relations here, with some real track record of success. We owe them a huge debt of gratitude for ensuring that a very tense international situation does not dissolve into a very serious situation in our own country. [

Applause

.]

This is a short debate, and I will, therefore, address two areas in my speech. Obviously, events since 7 October have unfolded as badly as, or even more badly than, any of us could have anticipated or predicted at the time of our previous discussion. I have to say that, irrespective of the speeches that we make in the chamber today, or of the calls for action from anywhere, it does not seem to me that we are anywhere near a resolution, or even a mitigation, of what is currently a desperately difficult position in the region. The consequences of that were very clearly and fairly laid out by Ivan McKee.

The call for a ceasefire is at the heart of the matter. There should not be a competition between parties for who has the boldest ceasefire. It is a question of the principle of a ceasefire. I think that people are troubled by why I and some others are reluctant to join in the call for an immediate ceasefire. That is not really a question of principle. I have looked at the terms associated with the calls for a ceasefire in the letter that Ian Murray sent to Stephen Flynn and in the Labour Party’s resolution in the House of Commons yesterday, a great deal of which I could agree with. However, contained in the calls for a ceasefire must be a recognition that there has to be a ceasefire on all sides. That means that rockets in and out of Gaza have to stop.

It must be recognised that the hostages have to be released. Some 134 of them still remain unaccounted for, including Kfir Bibas, who is one year old, Ariel Bibas, who is four years old, and Agam Berger, who is 19 years old and of whom nothing has subsequently been heard. Implicitly, that means that, at some point, there has to be a way forward in Gaza that does not leave the Hamas regime in place dictating the future, because it has made it clear that it will not respect a ceasefire and that it will resume its attacks on Israel at the earliest opportunity. We cannot have a ceasefire in which Israel ceases and Hamas fires; it has to be a ceasefire that we can believe will happen. If the hostages are released, Hamas is no longer able to influence the outcome of events, and there is a mutual ending of the attacks from both countries, I would be able to support a ceasefire. I hope that, out of that, we can see a much more likely secure future for the region.

Meanwhile, aid can now come into the country unrestricted. Some 13,000 trucks have entered at three crossing points. At the moment, there are 450 trucks in Gaza with aid that cannot be distributed. I recognise that there is a genuine fear on the part of those who would distribute that aid about doing that safely, so I can certainly support the idea that there should be a pause in hostilities in order for that aid to be as widely distributed as possible.

As I have said before, I do not support every action of the Israeli Government. I resent and reject the suggestion that I do. People ask me, “Why do you bother with any of this?” I stand here in a Parliament with Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Protestant and Catholic MSPs, but no Jew—never a Jew.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You need to conclude.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

As the member representing 50 per cent of Scotland’s Jewish community, I believe that I have a responsibility to articulate arguments on their behalf—as did my immediate predecessor, Ken Macintosh. However, that is not the same as endorsing all the actions of the Israeli Government.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you, Mr Carlaw. We will have to move on.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

It is important that we work together to secure a future for the region.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Neil Bibby, who has up to four minutes.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

I thank Ivan McKee for bringing the debate to the chamber.

The situation in Gaza is tragic and heartbreaking. I know that there are strongly held views across the chamber on the issue, which we all care about. Many innocent lives have been taken or destroyed. Countless children have died, and children continue to die each and every day. There are many families in Scotland with relatives in Gaza and Israel who have been impacted by the horror. They are victims of the tragedy, and we owe it to all of them to do everything possible to end the terror.

I welcome the fact that the House of Commons has joined the Scottish Parliament in voting to call for an immediate stop to the fighting and for a sustainable ceasefire. That follows the leaders of our allies Australia, Canada and New Zealand in their call for an end to the hostilities in order that hostages can be released.

I will focus my remarks on what needs to happen to help people on the ground now. Cessation of the violence is the only thing that will help, right now. We need an end to the fighting and to rocket fire going into and out of Gaza. That is needed in order to allow hostages to be safely exchanged while they are still alive, and for food, medicines and other aid supplies to get safely to those who need them.

We also need to say with one voice to Israel that it has, like any other state, the right to defend itself, not least from indiscriminate terrorist attack, but that every state also has a responsibility to exercise restraint and to be proportionate in its responses. There are legitimate questions to be asked about Israel’s actions. The International Court of Justice is the proper place for those questions to be adjudicated on. We respect its jurisdiction—so, too, should Israel.

We should also say with one voice that an assault on Rafah, where 1.5 million people are crammed together in unimaginable conditions with nowhere to go, would be unconscionable and would have disastrous consequences. Approximately 75 per cent of Gaza’s population are displaced—most of them in Rafah—and an estimated 17,000 children are separated from their families. We need de-escalation, not further escalation.

On 7 October 2023, we saw the largest loss of Jewish life, inflicted by Hamas, on any single day since the Holocaust. As Ivan McKee said, since then almost 30,000 Palestinians—the majority of them women and children—have been confirmed killed.

This has been an on-going situation for decades. From the ashes of this tragedy, there must be a renewed emphasis on a two-state solution, which is a position that all parties here share. That includes a safe and secure Israel, where the horrors that were inflicted by Hamas—which is a brutal antisemitic terrorist organisation—on 7 October can never happen again. It includes a viable Palestinian state alongside it, with safe borders and, ultimately, recognition for that Palestinian state—a state that, as Anas Sarwar recently put it,

“is not in the gift of a neighbour”,

but is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people.

In the face of the horrors of recent months, it is easy to sink into despair and hopelessness, but that will not help the innocent victims or stop the deaths, terror and violence. The two-state solution is still worth hoping and fighting for. We need to use every avenue of engagement with Israel and the international community to achieve and defend that outcome.

World leaders must redouble their efforts to forge a path to a sustainable and lasting peace, so that future generations of innocent men, women and children are not consigned to horrors and violence such as we have seen in recent months.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I thank Ivan McKee for bringing the debate to the chamber.

The situation that we see in Israel and Gaza is incredibly sad. It is also very long running—it has certainly been running since well before 1948, when we could say the present problems started.

Clearly, antisemitism is not the same as valid criticism of Israel, but neither are the two completely distinct and unconnected. Most of the Jews whom I know in Scotland and England have family and friends in Israel. It is the only Jewish state in the world and is, according to the Bible, the land that God gave his chosen people. Having said that, it does not mean that we cannot criticise the Jews or Israel. God himself is hugely critical of his people in much of the scriptures, not least when he punished them by exiling them to Babylon and elsewhere.

Therefore, is not antisemitic for some to say

that the present Israeli offensive has been over the top and has possibly crossed the line from defence to revenge. At the same time, we need to be balanced in our approach. For example, to say that we must not sell arms to Israel, but that it is okay to sell arms to Saudi Arabia or other countries that have much worse human rights records is somewhat inconsistent.

It is very difficult to ascertain all the facts around what has been happening in Gaza. The number of deaths is one issue. Of the Palestinians who have been killed, I gather that Hamas claims that 6,000 were military, whereas Israel claims that 12,000 were Hamas fighters. All such figures are difficult to verify when both sides have a fairly unclear line between who is military and who is civilian.

It seems that the number of civilian deaths in Gaza has been greater because Hamas deliberately built tunnels for military purposes directly beneath hospitals and residential areas. On that point, where did all the resources for those tunnels come from? Perhaps the situation for ordinary people in Gaza would be better today if resources had gone into civilian infrastructure rather than being diverted for military purposes.

I think that the United Nations, particularly the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, has some responsibility in that regard. Going forward, we need an agency that is more neutral than UNRWA to help the people of Gaza to rebuild.

Looking ahead, where are we going? In the short term, we want the fighting to cease, which must be linked to release of the hostages—or, sadly, their bodies—and both sides need to agree to cease fire. In the longer term, we need serious peace talks and negotiations. That will require that all sides recognise the others’ right to exist; we should remember that Iran and Hamas openly declare that they want Israel wiped off the face of the map.

I partly blame the international community for not pushing harder for peace talks over the years. Both Israel and Palestine are relatively small entities in world terms. Much larger players, including the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran, have key parts to play. They can put pressure on the respective sides to get to the table and negotiate. There should be no preconditions about borders or anything else—only acceptance of the other sides’ right to exist should be required.

Having said that the bigger countries have a part to play, however, I also think that we should remember the example that was set by Norway, which hosted peace talks in the early 1990s. I would like the United Kingdom and Scotland to play such a role, as peacemakers. That would mean not cheering on either side, but building relationships with both sides and, I hope, being trusted by both sides.

I will finish on a more personal note. While I was in London just after the new year, I attended a Jewish synagogue one Friday evening. Only about 15 to 20 people were there, but three security guards were needed on duty. What happens in Israel and Gaza affects us here, too.

Let us all commit to being as even-handed as we can be, and to seeking to be peacemakers as much as we can be.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank Ivan McKee for bringing this important and timely debate. I apologise to the Presiding Officer and the Parliament: I set a meeting last November that I have, unavoidably, to chair, so I cannot stay until the end of the debate. Members who know me know that, if it were not for that, I would be here until the end. I apologise sincerely.

As we all speak today, Israel launches more air strikes in Rafah. Sadly, there will be even more deaths than the 30,000 civilians who have been killed so far. Up to 100,000 have been injured, and 10,000 children have been killed. There are no functioning hospitals and no services to protect people. There will be no emergency services to rescue people from under the rubble. Many Gazans go to sleep at night knowing that their relatives are buried under rubble and might still be alive.

Some 1.7 million people have been displaced—more than once. Some of them were already refugees, from 1948 and 1967, but now many have been displaced five, six or seven times.

The speed of the bombing, the unprecedented scale of the military operation and the indiscriminate nature of the weapons that strike Gazans—including white phosphorous—make the situation like nothing we have witnessed in any recent modern war.

Those who have followed the horrible and horrific examples of what has happened in Gaza could not have failed to notice the story that has been reported by the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, of Hind Najab. She was a young girl who died alone trying to call emergency services—her last hours spent in a car surrounded by the dead bodies of her relatives, reporting a tank coming towards her. A few days later, we found out that she was dead.

The strategy has been laid bare. The Israeli hostages—who must be protected and released—are not even a priority for Netanyahu, as is clear from the statements that he has made. Members of his Government have also said that there is no such thing as an innocent Palestinian, and others who are more extreme have said that they want, if they can clear Gaza, more settlements and Palestinians removed.

It is about time that we stood up and said that the dehumanisation of the Palestinian population—the denial of their rights and of their existence—is not tolerable. People cannot even leave Gaza. Most members who are participating in this debate know that Gazans have been under blockade for 17 years. The world has a lot to answer for.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

I do not have time, unfortunately. I am sorry, Paul.

Dr Margaret Harris, who like many brave doctors has served in Gaza, recently reported that emergency services expect to see young men, but are seeing children. That is because more than 50 per cent of the population in Gaza is under the age of 18.

While all that is happening, there is more violence on the west bank. We will not see much of it because we are watching what is happening in Gaza, but the violence there is quite horrific. Israeli settlers, who are illegally in the occupied territories, are stealing Palestinian homes and being protected by the Israeli army while they do so.

I believe that Palestine is the moral question of our time, and that the matter is not just about standing up for a ceasefire now. As Ivan McKee said in his opening speech, 75 years after the Palestinians were promised a state of their own, and after 56 years of illegal occupation, more than 100 countries now recognise Palestine. It is not out of step to do so. Where one stands on the question matters, because the hopes and dreams of Israelis and Palestinians depend on it.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I thank Ivan McKee for bringing this debate to the chamber. It is fair to say that he has always championed the issue, including before the current crisis that is unfolding.

On 21 November last year, I stood in the chamber and fully condemned the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel and the following collective punishment of the Palestinian people by Israel. I said that all hostages must be released. I stand by those comments and fully condemn violence in all its forms.

What has happened since we last debated the issue in the chamber should shock and shame us all. There are more than 30,000 dead in Palestine, including 12,300-plus children and 8,400-plus women. That is children, women and innocent civilians, not Hamas terrorists. Hospitals and schools have been hit hard, and we have all seen the absolutely shocking scenes on television. What could possibly be the justification for the continuation of this slaughter?

Some suggest that, while Hamas still exists, the slaughter is justified. I am fully of the opinion that it is not. Innocent people are being killed and, as we have said, many of them are children. To those who believe in that justification, I say clearly that it is not and cannot be a justification. As we have heard from Ivan McKee and others, Jewish voices are increasingly condemning Israel’s actions.

I am pleased that Ivan McKee’s motion mentions the ruling by the International Court of Justice, which I hope all Governments of the world will acknowledge. Pauline McNeill mentioned the heartbreaking scenes in Rafah. Many people have fled to the area and now face the threat of continuing attacks there. What the people of Palestine and Gaza must be feeling is just unthinkable.

A ceasefire now is the only option. Why do some politicians still feel reluctant to call for a ceasefire, as we saw in Westminster yesterday? We do not need to worry about other actors to call for the end of the slaughter of innocent civilians. A friend said to me recently:

“If this was literally anywhere else in the world, it would not be tolerated.”

He is right, because there are plenty of examples of such actions not being tolerated. In Ukraine, for example, what we have done is right, and we should be proud of our stance on Ukraine. I am very proud of that and of the fact that many Ukrainians now call Scotland their home, including many in Coatbridge. Of course, there are other examples of the UK and Scotland taking an international stance on war. However, it seems to me that, to the UK Government and other Governments of the world, the children and people of Gaza are second-class citizens.

What do we tell our kids about what we have done at this point in history? Pauline McNeill said it much better than I can: this is a pivotal moment and an issue for everyone of our generation. It is absolutely shocking that our kids and young people are watching the scenes unfold on TV, as is everyone else. What are politicians doing? There must be a ceasefire now. Fighting must end on all sides. A two-state solution must be found, and the state of Palestine must be recognised.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

As colleagues have done, I thank Ivan McKee for bringing the debate to the Parliament, and I thank Kaukab Stewart for the work that she did on the issue before her appointment as a minister.

I congratulate those who peacefully protested outside the Parliament building last night and those who took direct action to try to obstruct the arrival of Israel’s arms dealers to this nation’s Parliament while the nation of Israel and the military forces that are armed by those companies are conducting a campaign of genocide in Gaza. The real shame at the building last night was that a wine reception for arms dealers went ahead during a genocide.

Is there any doubt now that it is a genocide? More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, including at least 12,500 children. We know that that number is an undercount, because the reality is that the vast majority of those who have been reported as missing are dead under the rubble—that is why they are unaccounted for.

I want to read from an article in the

Los Angeles Times

by American surgeon Dr Irfan Galaria, who spent time in Gaza in recent weeks. He said:

“I stopped keeping track of how many new orphans I had operated on. After surgery they would be filed somewhere in the hospital, I’m unsure of who will take care of them or how they will survive. On one occasion, a handful of children, all about ages 5 to 8, were carried to the emergency room by their parents. All had single sniper shots to the head. These families were returning to their homes in Khan Yunis, about 2.5 miles away from the hospital, after Israeli tanks had withdrawn. But the snipers apparently stayed behind. None of these children survived.”

The Hamas attack on 7 October was horrific. It was evil and unjustifiable. Members will remember that, in the days after, a lot of attention was paid not to the very real stories of horror from that day but to a false story of 40 babies being murdered in a kibbutz. I note that many of the news organisations that reported that story are silent about the actual massacre—the verified massacre—of children and the deliberate slaughter and execution of toddlers and babies taking place in Gaza, even when it is recorded on video. Children are having their limbs amputated and women are giving birth by caesarean section without anaesthetic, because Israel is blocking medical supplies from getting in.

Gazans are being collectively punished, which is a war crime—we all know that it is a war crime. The shameful events in Westminster last night put the whole country to shame, because one party refused to acknowledge that the use of the phrase “collective punishment” was appropriate. Attempts to bully and threaten the Speaker of the House of Commons to derail a ceasefire debate put the UK to shame. While that farce was taking place, Israel was still bombing Rafah—a refugee camp containing 1.5 million innocent people.

These questions were asked. Why does the UK’s position matter? Why do debates such as those in the House of Commons last night and here today matter? They matter because the UK arms Israel, gives political support to Israel and blocks Israel from being held to account at the United Nations. No one looks back at the international campaign against apartheid in South Africa and claims that it was of no consequence, and nobody will look back at the international campaign of solidarity with the people of Palestine and say the same thing.

We can make a direct impact in Scotland. Instead of inviting arms dealers to wine receptions, we should divest them of all public funds, including our pension funds. We should ban every company that is complicit in the occupation from receiving a public grant or contract. The First Minister agreed to that in principle in December, and we need to see progress.

We need an immediate and permanent ceasefire. We need the release of all Israeli and Palestinian hostages, including the children who are held in Israel’s jails. We need Israel to withdraw to its 1967 borders and end the siege of Gaza and the occupation of the west bank. That is what we need for a lasting peace.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

Since the motion was lodged, the situation in Gaza has worsened significantly. The daily death rate in Gaza is higher than in any other major 21st century conflict. More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 12,300 children, and 69,000 have been injured since 7 October 2023. Those numbers do not include the thousands of people who are still missing under the rubble and collapsed buildings.

The Israeli air force has reported that it has struck 30,000 of what it has identified as Hamas targets in Gaza since its offensive began. Those strikes have completely destroyed 70,000 housing units and damaged 290,000 more, with 392 education facilities, 11 bakeries, 123 ambulances, three churches and 184 mosques reported to have been completely or partially destroyed.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has reported that not a single hospital in the Gaza strip is fully functioning. As a result of the lack of functioning healthcare, more than 200,000 cases of acute respiratory infections and more than 500,000 cases of communicable diseases have been recorded. Supplies of food, proper sanitation and clean water are now seriously insufficient.

Just last month, the IPC warned about serious food security concerns. It said that 2.2 million people are now at imminent risk of famine, with 378,000 of them designated at phase 5, which means an extreme lack of food, starvation and the exhaustion of coping capabilities.

Israel has the right to protect its citizens, but it also has a responsibility to abide by international law and to minimise the number of civilian casualties. The situation in Gaza has gone far beyond a justifiable response to the attacks on 7 October.

The collective punishment of civilians is never the answer. Israel’s war cabinet has now warned that, if the remaining hostages are not released by the beginning of the holy month of Ramadan, it will broaden its offensive in southern Gaza and push into the city of Rafah.

The Rafah crossing to Egypt remains one of the only possible routes out of Gaza. Rafah is currently home to more than a million Gazan civilians who have been displaced and have fled there to seek shelter. If a ground invasion takes place, the death toll could be unimaginable.

An immediate and lasting ceasefire is now imperative. That means diplomatic mediation to ensure a lasting agreement and a permanent two-state solution, an end to rocket fire both in and out of Gaza, immediate humanitarian aid into Gaza and the immediate release of all hostages.

The fighting must stop now, before we are looking at the complete annihilation of Gaza and its civilians. Ceasefire now.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

W

e need an immediate ceasefire and an end to the collective punishment of the Palestinian people.

As a forward-thinking and compassionate nation, we cannot stand by while an obvious genocide happens. The killing of innocent civilians and the brutal slaughter of children must end. The civilian death toll—which stands at around 30,000 people in Gaza, more than 1,000 people in Israel, and more than 300 in the West Bank—is rising daily. The only way to end the suffering is an immediate ceasefire and the release of all hostages and those who have been detained without charge. The relentless suffering that is being faced by the people of Gaza has been weighing on the hearts and minds of so many across the country.

Two days ago, Andrew Gilmour, the United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights from 2016 to 2019, said:

“Israel’s onslaught against Gaza is probably the highest kill rate of any military killing anywhere since the Rwandan genocide in 1994.”

I have joined thousands on the streets to protest and call for an immediate ceasefire, an end to collective punishment and an end to illegal occupation. I am glad to see that, since that, and with the pressure from the Scottish National Party, the new Labour Party has backed calls for a ceasefire—at least of a sort. External pressure does more for Labour at the moment than what is enshrined in its internal principles.

The Tories and the Labour Party made a devastating mistake by opposing a ceasefire in November. Lives have been lost and the death toll has since risen enormously. Their failure to back calls for a ceasefire earlier will be remembered in the history books with their names on it. Yesterday in Westminster, new Labour’s position was appalling. The new Labour cabal came together to deny a motion that called for an immediate ceasefire and an end to the collective punishment of Palestinian people.

“Newsnight” journalist Nicholas Watt said that the House of Commons speaker was left in “no doubt” that new Labour would “bring him down” after the general election unless he allowed a weak new Labour amendment on Gaza. The new Labour junior deputy speaker, Rosie Winterton, was then deployed to defend the indefensible. Like most Labour stitch-ups, it ended in disaster and humiliation, but it was still cheered on by some lapsed Corbynistas in the Parliament who want to be chummed with the arms industry that provides weapons to Israel.

Most of us have never experienced anything close to the level of horror in Gaza, so comments from Dr Salim Ghayyda have stuck with me. Dr Ghayyda grew up in Gaza and he has family there. He now works as a consultant paediatrician in Inverness.

When discussing his family, he said;

“The stories of immense suffering I hear from them every day. Every part of their life turns into an astonishing amount of suffering. There is nothing in their life that you could consider a life, actually. Water is contaminated and they eat one meal a day. The number of children killed is around 12,000 to 14,000. Do you know how many children there are in Inverness? 14,000. Imagine we, the Scottish people, wake up one day and all the children in Inverness have been killed. This is what happened to the children in Gaza. Stop. Enough is enough. Stop this genocide, please.”

Those comments are terrifying. This perpetual cycle of violence has been going on for far too long. We either call for the killing to end or we sit by and let the death total escalate. History will judge us all on that. We need an immediate ceasefire and an end to the collective punishment.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I thank Ivan McKee for leading the debate. I say to Marie McNair that we are here with power borrowed from the people. We are here with a chance to make a difference, to do the right thing and to do the right thing by humanity. What we are debating today is not an electoral calculation but a profoundly moral question. That is also why I say to the Government that it cannot vote in favour of a ceasefire and condemn collective punishment and continue to fund the firms in Scotland that are arming the Israeli Government. International law must apply to all. Supplying arms to a country that is in breach of international law is itself a breach of international law. Why is it so easy to supply a state with weapons but so difficult to supply starving children with food and injured people with medicines?

It is my deepest conviction that all that the people of Israel and Palestine want is the chance to live in peace. In the horror of this war, all that the people of Gaza want is to live. They want their children to live and they want to live free.

We condemn the action of Hamas on 7 October. I do not support Hamas. I want peace. I want the return of all hostages. When we call for a ceasefire, we are calling for a ceasefire on both sides. But history did not start on 7 October. The story of the Palestinian people is a story of injustice, of forced dispossession, of forced displacement, of forced dispersal and of forced disinheritance. Today, once again, innocent people, including thousands upon thousands of children, are being punished for a crime that they did not commit.

There is a deep revulsion against what is happening, the terror of what is happening, the criminality of what is happening and the morality of the slaughter of innocents, including children. That is why it would be a betrayal to remain silent. That is why the calls that we have heard since October for pauses or de-escalation are tantamount to indecision at best and to compliance with the reign of violence that has so far killed 30,000 people, 40 per cent of whom are children, at worst.

As the Palestinian people are once again being told to flee their homes, we should heed the words of the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish, who wrote:

“Where should we go after the last frontiers?

Where should the birds fly after the last sky?”

To speak out as a member of the Parliament is not an act of protest but the exercise of power. It is to show political and moral leadership. It is to stand up for hope in place of fear. It is to be realistic, because it is to be realistic to want a change from this existing reality to a new one. That is why many of us are here. That is what I am here to support. Justice for humanity. An end to the illegal occupation. Freedom for Palestine. The triumph of peace over war. Ceasefire, now.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Last November, I said:

“I put on record my condemnation of the horrific, inhumane terrorist attack on Israelis that was carried out by Hamas on 7 October.”—[

Official Report

, 21 November 2023; c 39.]

Today, I reiterate that condemnation, and I add to it my condemnation of the horrific, inhumane actions that we have since witnessed unfolding against the innocent civilian population of Gaza. As I said in November, humanity defines human beings collectively, and collective punishment is, therefore, an act of inhumanity. We do not get to pick and choose which acts are humane or inhumane; if we wish to condemn one act of inhumanity, we must condemn all acts of inhumanity. To do otherwise is simply to debase ourselves as human beings.

Since then, the situation has only worsened and the suffering has only intensified. More than 29,000 Palestinians are dead, and more than 66,000 have been injured. Those figures might seem clinical to some, but I urge members to look beyond mere figures. More than two thirds of those who have been killed—more than 200 a day—are women and children. Families have been torn apart. Of those who have been injured, there are children who are traumatised for life, their limbs amputated without pain relief, left screaming in the darkness for hours without end. We must condemn that too. We must speak as one on the need to end that inhumanity.

Yesterday, we witnessed the House of Commons descend into chaos when debating the issue. Today, please let us speak with one voice—a voice that echoes and amplifies the overwhelming view of the international community, of the world. That voice says, “Enough is enough.”

The time for a comprehensive ceasefire and a credible peace process is now. Let us speak with one voice for those who are suffering, but let us not forget that we are also a voice for our constituents. It saddens me to listen to young people who are affected by what they hear and see happening in Gaza, but who feel powerless and inexpert, and unable to speak out, and it saddens me to see the mental distress that that causes them.

In that respect, education about the history and the seeds of today’s conflicts is invaluable. In reading over the material for the debate that was prepared by the Scottish Parliament information centre, which I thank, I was heartened to see an overview of the history of the land front and centre. That gives us context, knowledge and understanding.

Today, as new reports show that around 90 per cent of Gaza’s children under the age of two are malnourished or worse, and as starvation looms for many more, as the relentless bombing continues day and night, and as the spectre looms of a ground invasion of Rafah, where more than 1.5 million Palestinians are sheltering in fear for their lives, there seems to be little hope. However, let us speak as one and offer hope for tomorrow.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank Ivan McKee for bringing this vital debate to the chamber, for his work in this area and for his kind comments on the work that members on all sides have done together across the chamber.

When all around us is war and the lust for war, it is important to be clear that we, in this Parliament, stand for peace. I do not need to reiterate the sheer number of needless deaths in this conflict or the plight of people who have been taken hostage or tortured. In my contribution, I will, as I have done previously, highlight a terrifying reality that is often left unmentioned by the media: the disgraceful number of pregnant women who have lost the children that they were carrying before or shortly after their birth, and who have, in many cases, simply been prevented from having access to the necessities of childbirth.

There are about 50,000 pregnant women in Gaza, and 40 per cent of those pregnancies have been classed as high risk. Nevertheless, 180 women still give birth daily—can you imagine? Despite the situation, they must carry a child while being exposed to constant bombing and try to give it adequate nutrition in a country that is being starved to death. Can any of us even begin to imagine what that is like? Can we imagine what it is like not to have clean water to hydrate ourselves or to clean and wash our newborn baby?

As the International Court of Justice noted in its recent order, under international law, that is illegal and Israel must stop doing it. Nevertheless, since that ruling in January, reports of exactly the same actions have come out. I cannot adequately explain how I feel about that. How must the families feel? They must be absolutely terrified. To carry a child can be a worrisome experience at the best of times, but to be doing so in a war zone, and to realise that no one is coming to help you, is utterly unimaginable.

As a citizen of one of the most powerful countries in the world, I feel desperately ashamed that weapons that are funded from the UK and, no doubt, manufactured in Scotland have been used to perpetuate that. No amount of GDP is worth being involved in that.

I want to be clear that the time for peace came long ago. The situation has gone well past the point of self-defence, and the leadership of both Hamas and Israel are engaged in a fatal battle to the death that will spill further across the region, which is, of course, a worry. The violence must stop. We must not remain silent. We must have an immediate ceasefire.

I thank members for the opportunity to speak and to raise those voices. I am glad that, on the whole, we have had a constructive tone in the chamber today.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I invite Kaukab Stewart to respond to the debate.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I thank Ivan McKee for securing the debate. The conflict in Gaza is a human tragedy, and it is important that the Parliament’s voice is heard. The Scottish Government has been consistent in condemning the abhorrent terrorist actions of Hamas, whose vile and merciless attacks on 7 October represented the single worst massacre of the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and in calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire by all sides in Israel and Gaza. A ceasefire is the only way that we can halt the catastrophic human suffering in Gaza and allow hostages to be released. I repeat the Scottish Government’s demands for Hamas to release immediately and unconditionally all hostages and to cease all missile attacks against Israel.

Hamas can have no future in Gaza. The cycle of violence must end. The bombs and rockets must stop. Humanitarian and medical facilities must be protected, and civilians, wherever they are, must be given unrestricted access to the basic necessities of life. Israel, like any other country, has the right to protect itself and its citizens from terror. However, in exercising its right to defend itself, Israel must abide by international humanitarian law.

The First Minister has urged the UK Government to accept that the time has come to speak out forcefully and make it clear that Israel’s military action has gone way beyond a legitimate response to the appalling attacks of 7 October. The Scottish Government respects international norms and the rule of law. It is therefore correct that any potential breach of international law, including the crime of genocide, should be investigated by the appropriate authorities and international bodies. The interim ruling of the International Court of Justice on 26 July was clear: the killing and destruction in Gaza must stop, urgent humanitarian assistance must be provided to prevent more suffering, and hostages must be released immediately.

The Scottish Government’s position is consistent with that of the vast majority of the international community. In late October, the United Nations General Assembly voted for a resolution that demanded

“an immediate, durable and sustained humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities”.

In December, a much larger majority of the General Assembly voted for another resolution that demanded “an immediate humanitarian ceasefire”, along with

“the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access”.

Just last week, the Prime Ministers of our Commonwealth partners Australia, New Zealand and Canada issued a rare joint statement calling for “An immediate humanitarian ceasefire” and for hostages to be released. That statement was inspired by increasing indications that Israel is planning a full-scale assault against Rafah, which, until the past few weeks, has been a relatively safe place for displaced Gazans as the brutal conflict has progressed.

The President of the United States has reportedly urged Prime Minister Netanyahu not to launch a military operation in Rafah without a credible and executable plan to protect civilians. Since then, without any mention of how civilians—most of whom have lost their homes—are to be protected, we have heard the chilling warning from Israeli ministers that such an offensive will take place before Ramadan unless hostages are released.

I pay tribute to those who have spoken in the debate. It has been a respectful and serious debate. I thank Ivan McKee, Pauline McNeill and Richard Leonard, who outlined effectively the historical context in which the conflict lies, for the emotional and heartfelt contributions that they made.

I reassure Jackson Carlaw that, in my opinion, a political intervention, not a military intervention, will bring the situation to an end. Neil Bibby spoke of de-escalation, which is essential, and I have called for it myself. John Mason was correct to point at the international community for not trying harder for peace talks over the years.

I pay tribute to Foysol Choudhury, Pauline McNeill and Carol Mochan, among other members, who mentioned the devastating impact on human life, birth and death, as well as the infrastructure that is being devastated across the region.

I thank Ross Greer for highlighting my previous work on the issue, for his commitment and for pointing out the historical context.

Several members were right to highlight that collective punishment of innocent civilians is unacceptable. I acknowledge Marie McNair, who mentioned marching alongside thousands of people, as have many colleagues in the chamber. The people are on the streets. We need to make sure that we are on the right side of history and that we reflect the views of the people. Members have said that we are speaking for our constituents, and Bill Kidd rightly said that the Parliament should speak with one voice as we go towards a future that has hope.

We must recognise the deep trauma that the Israeli people have suffered as a result of the 7 October attacks and acknowledge that the Jewish communities globally, including those in Scotland, feel that trauma. The conflicts in the middle east do not justify racial or religious hatred of any kind. In recent weeks, we have seen a shocking global increase in antisemitism and Islamophobia. I emphasise that there is no place in Scotland for such behaviour. The Scottish Government is committed to building supportive and safe communities where divisive narratives will not resonate. We will continue to engage closely with our communities across Scotland to provide vital reassurance and ensure that nobody feels marginalised.

I am pleased that the House of Commons has finally agreed to call for an immediate ceasefire, which the Scottish Government has consistently done for months. Enough is enough.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the debate.

13:53 Meeting suspended.

14:01 On resuming—

Social Justice

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

G

ood afternoon. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions, and the portfolio on this occasion is social justice. As ever, members wishing to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak buttons during the relevant question.

Housing (Glasgow)

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address the housing emergency in Glasgow. (S6O-03102)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Glasgow housing conveners say that their biggest pressure is increasing numbers of newly recognised refugee households, driven by Home Office mismanagement of the asylum process. With no additional support from Westminster, we have provided more than £121 million to Glasgow to fund homelessness services and to increase the supply of social and affordable homes.

Homelessness pressures have been exacerbated by the United Kingdom Government’s freeze of local housing allowance. I have today written to the relevant secretary of state,

ahead of the UK budget, to urge implementation of the LHA uplift in the years beyond 2024-25, and I hope that the member will help with those calls on her colleagues at Westminster.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

Homelessness is spiralling out of control in Glasgow, and it should never have reached a point where Glasgow City Council had to declare a housing emergency. Unfortunately, the work around Sighthill and the Red Road in the north of the city is moving at a snail’s pace, with only a fraction of the demolished homes being replaced with new builds. At the same time, we are faced with a Scottish Government that has cut £200 million from the housing budget. What action is the minister’s Government taking right now to increase the supply of affordable homes in Glasgow, so that no one is left on the street?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I have mentioned the £121 million that we have used to fund homelessness services in Glasgow and to increase the supply of social and affordable homes, and there are a number of other things that I want to mention. First, the capital budget cut from the member’s Government equates to 10 per cent—and there are a few other things, too. The member will be aware of this year’s homelessness monitor from Crisis, which has just come out, and one of the biggest issues that it discusses in relation to the increase in homelessness is LHA rates. Again, I refer the member back to the letter that I wrote today, and I hope that she can support the request contained in it.

As for the asylum process and the dispersal process, it is good that the asylum process has been speeded up. However, no additional funding is coming from the UK Government for that at all—none whatever.

I therefore have a couple of asks of Annie Wells in that respect. First, the capital budget needs to be restored following the cut; LHA uplift has to be brought back; and there must be funding to follow the asylum process.

I have met representatives of the housing associations on a number of occasions. We are looking to work with the Scottish Cities Alliance, of which Glasgow is a part, to bring forward some of its developments as quickly as we possibly can.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

The Scottish Government must adopt a range of approaches to address housing pressures, not just in Glasgow but right across Scotland. I feel that part of the approach should be to ensure that existing housing stock is being used effectively. Can the minister update the Parliament on his work to ensure that long-term empty homes are brought back into use? That would go some way towards addressing the current situation.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Our investment of £396,500 in 2023-24 continues our support for the Scottish empty homes partnership, which has worked closely with local authorities including Glasgow City Council to bring more than 9,000 homes back into use since 2010. The partnership’s role was recognised by an independent audit of the effectiveness of interventions to bring empty homes back into use, which we commissioned and published last year.

We have already acted on some of the audit’s recommendations, such as working with local authorities to improve statistics on empty homes and providing powers to grant a grace period from council tax premiums for new owners of long-term empty homes. My letter of 19 September 2023 to the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee set out a range of our other activities to bring more houses back into use.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations released YouGov polling that showed that 80 per cent of people believe that we are in the grip of a housing emergency. Indeed, a number of authorities have declared an emergency, with more to follow. Why is the Government so reluctant to acknowledge what everyone else seems to see, which is that we are in a housing emergency? I fully accept that, as the minister said in his response to Annie Wells, some factors are outwith his control, but why not declare that emergency and get everyone around the table to start addressing it?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I acknowledge that we are in a difficult position at the moment, but it is the same for the United Kingdom Government and the Welsh Government. The most important thing is the actions that we take. Annie Wells talked about Glasgow; when I meet local authorities, as I regularly do, we talk about actions that we need to take.

If there is an incoming Labour Government, I would ask it to look at restoring the capital budget after the cut. I have also referred to the LHA uplift rate, and I hope that Mark Griffin can take that issue back to an incoming Labour Government.

We are working very hard. We have provided £556 million in the draft budget so far, and we are looking at working closely with Glasgow, Edinburgh and other local authorities. However, the actions that we take are the most important thing and, as I have said, I will continue to work as hard as I can to make sure that we build houses as quickly as we can.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 2 has

not been lodged.

Best Start Grant (Falkirk East)

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what work is under way to ensure that eligible families across Falkirk East, and the wider country, are aware of and can apply for the best start grant before the deadline of 29 February. (S6O-03104)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We have made it easier for families to get the best start grant school age payment, with people in receipt of the Scottish child payment now paid the school age payment automatically. There is no need to apply separately.

Since November 2022, we have made more than 43,000 early learning and school age payments. Some people who do not get the Scottish child payment are still eligible, and Social Security Scotland is actively promoting the payment across different channels ahead of the application deadline.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

The

best start grant goes hand in hand with the best start food grant to benefit families most in need. The most up-to-date figures show that the pregnancy and baby payment and the best start food grant made up the majority of applications, at 59 per cent and 81 per cent respectively, while applications to other aspects of the best start grant, such as the early learning payment and the school age payment, remain at 23 per cent and 13 per cent respectively.

Can the minister confirm whether the early learning payment and the school age payment will continue to work through an automatic awards scheme if parents are in receipt of the Scottish child payment? What more can be done to raise awareness of those specific benefits?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

T

he member raises an important point about ensuring that everyone who is eligible and entitled to a benefit is encouraged and supported to apply, so that they can get what they are entitled to.

I can confirm that the auto awards scheme is in place. Early learning and school age payments are an important part of the work that we are doing on automation, which makes it easier for families to maximise their take-up. Some of the official statistics might be playing catch-up in showing that, but we are confident that the automated payments are working successfully in driving up take-up. Latest estimates of take-up rates indicate a significant impact from automation, with the take-up of the school age payment rising from 77 per cent in 2021-22 to 97 per cent in 2022-23.

Social Security Scotland continues to raise awareness, but I am happy to reassure the member that we are continuing to keep a close eye on that. I encourage all members to work with their constituents to ensure that we do everything that we can to raise awareness of the Scottish child payment and the associated family payments that are associated with and attached to it.

Inward Migration (Rest of the UK)

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to attract more working-age people from the rest of the United Kingdom to come and live, work and pay tax in Scotland. (S6O-03105)

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

We will continue to take action across Government and with partners to promote Scotland as a career destination, highlighting the breadth of job opportunities available across Scotland. The things that set Scotland apart from the rest of the UK, such as free prescriptions and access to a world-class education system, show that Scotland is a welcoming, inclusive and diverse society. As part of this approach, in 2024, the Scottish Government will launch a talent attraction and migration service to help to attract, relocate and settle working-age people and their families in Scotland, including people who are currently living in the rest of the UK.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Scotland already benefits from more working-age people coming here from the rest of the UK to live and work than those who move in the opposite direction. A modest 20 per cent increase in the number of people moving to Scotland would have the potential, if they were all higher-rate taxpayers, to raise an additional £1 billion in income tax revenues over the course of a parliamentary session. What proactive work is the Scottish Government doing to attract more working-age people from the rest of the UK, and what results has that work delivered so far?

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Ivan McKee

is right to point out the economic impact and benefit of having more working-age people. Employers are helping us to develop the talent attraction and migration service to ensure that it can support businesses to attract workers from outwith Scotland who have the skills that are needed.

Our addressing depopulation action plan outlines support for local communities and economies to be sustainable, which includes attracting the skills and people that are needed. Evidence shows that those who choose Scotland as their home help to grow our economy, increase productivity and innovation and address skills shortages. They also contribute positively to communities, culture and public services. As I have already stated, the unique benefits of living in Scotland set us apart from the rest of the UK.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

There are several

supplementary questions.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Any understanding of the Laffer curve seems to escape members on the Scottish National Party front benches. Rather than increasing the number of taxpayers, the SNP seems hellbent on sending them away in what has been termed the “tartan exodus”. One of the main deterrents to living and working in Scotland is the widening tax gap, which is also likely to impede the economic growth that is needed to deliver public services. When taxpayers leave—as is inevitable—how does the minister intend to protect spending on public services?

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Investment in public services is crucial, as the member has said. That is exactly what we are providing through our progressive tax system, which asks those who are on the higher earning scale to pay a little bit more into the public purse to allow us to provide the types of services that will encourage people to live and work in Scotland. I think that people choose where to live based on many factors and not simply because of their tax bracket. I hope that the offer that we have been putting forward to people, as I outlined in my answers to Ivan McKee, will encourage the people with the skills that we need to make their lives in Scotland.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I am genuinely puzzled. Net migration to the UK was at 750,000 last year, but the population in Scotland is projected to decline. Why are we not managing to attract more of those 750,000 people?

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I have been clear throughout all engagement in the chamber on the topic of migration that the UK’s migration system does not work for Scotland. The fact that people are not managing to move to Scotland and that they are not seeing the unique offer that Scotland has for them when using the routes that they are able to take to come to the UK, is a symptom of that issue. We are proposing changes to a range of things, including through introducing the talent attraction and migration system, which will allow people to be matched to highly skilled jobs that they can take up in Scotland. We are also proposing to the UK Government that asylum seekers be allowed the right to work in Scotland, and we are asking that the offers in Scotland are communicated properly to people who seek a place where they can contribute positively to a community.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I warmly congratulate the minister on the work that she is doing in relation to tackling the question of depopulation in parts of Scotland. That goes to the heart of being part of a Government that acts in the interests of the whole of the country.

Will the minister commit to work with colleagues with different responsibilities to ensure that we link the work on tackling depopulation to the work on economic opportunity, so that, in some of the more isolated and remote areas of Scotland, we are able to create a growing population based on good, strong economic opportunities?

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Absolutely.

An exciting part of the work on addressing depopulation is the fact that it involves every portfolio across Government. I will work with ministers whose responsibilities cover all areas because we know that the drivers of depopulation and the ways in which we can attract people to those areas that are suffering depopulation, and retain them there, touch on every area of Government. I will work with ministers who are responsible for the economy, transport, housing and the environment to make sure that we empower people to remain in the communities that they grew up in, to take up skilled work in areas that are suffering depopulation and to rebalance our population and ensure that public services can be sustainable, no matter where they are.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Questions 5 and 6 have been withdrawn.

Benefits Uptake

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that people are claiming all the benefits that they are entitled to, in light of figures obtained by Policy in Practice showing that £18.7 billion of benefits went unclaimed across the United Kingdom in 2022-23. (S6O-03108)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Scottish Government asserts that social security is a human right, and we are committed to helping people to access the support that they are entitled to.

Through our benefit take-up strategy, we are implementing a range of take-up initiatives, including access to independent advocacy support and targeted marketing of payments. Local delivery teams assist people in completing application forms and can signpost them to other information and services. The £12.5 million of funding that we are providing this year for income maximisation, welfare and debt advice includes more than £4.59 million to support organisations that help people to access their social security entitlements and maximise their income.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar was recently quoted in the

New Statesman

as saying that Holyrood had been largely “a social policy parliament” and that he wanted to correct that. Given that it is clear that social security and benefit uptake are a low priority for the Labour leadership, can the cabinet secretary provide an assurance that, unlike Westminster, Holyrood will continue to challenge austerity and cruel measures such as the bedroom tax and the two-child cap?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

This Government will continue to call for an end to measures such as the bedroom tax and the two-child cap. We will also continue to press the UK Government to implement an essentials guarantee at the forthcoming UK budget. It is deeply disappointing that Labour is simply promising more of the same Tory austerity. It is not necessary to hold a review in order to know that the two-child cap and the bedroom tax are utterly inappropriate parts of any social security system.

Meanwhile, the Scottish Government will continue to provide record investment in benefits expenditure, which demonstrates our commitment to tackling poverty right across the country. That is exactly why we are spending more than £1.1 billion more than the UK Government gives to the Scottish Government for social security. We are there to protect the people of Scotland through continued austerity, regardless of the colour of the Government at UK level.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The cabinet secretary and her predecessor said that no one would lose out because of Scottish National Party changes to our social security payments, but we know that that is not true. The winter heating payment has left many people in the Highlands and Aberdeenshire out of pocket. Will the cabinet secretary undertake a review of that policy so that people who live in Aviemore, Braemar and Aboyne do not continue to lose out at the hands of the SNP-Green Government?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I am happy to provide in writing to Mr Briggs the figures for the number of people who are benefiting from our winter heating payment and the investment that is being put in. Over the years, because of the vagaries of the previous Westminster system, there was doubt about whether people would get any money at all, how much money they would get and when. They now have certainty—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Lumsden!

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

In addition, a much more substantial number of people are getting that funding. The need for such certainty and security for many more people across Scotland came through in our consultation, and that is exactly what we are delivering.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

The record of the most recent Labour Government in lifting millions of children and pensioners out of poverty by expanding social security payments and encouraging uptake of those payments speaks for itself.

Analysis by the Scottish Government that was published in November last year showed that only three quarters of eligible people had taken up the young carer grant, that only 61 per cent of eligible people had taken up the funeral support payment, which was down from the previous year, and that only 15 per cent of eligible people had taken up the job start payment. Is that not another example of the SNP levelling legitimate and justified criticism at the Department for Work and Pensions and saying that it will do things better, but failing to do so?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The member fails to point out that many of the benefits that he has mentioned are not even available from the DWP but have been brought in only in Scotland because we are committed to delivering for care-experienced people. The job start payment is one of the benefits that is available only in Scotland.

The Labour Party promises a review to see what it might do at some point in the future, but we have already made changes to the job start payment because we recognise that there is more to do on the take-up of that benefit. That shows a Government that not only is delivering new benefits in Scotland but is continuously adapting and improving the service that we give to the people of Scotland. That action and delivery does far more to tackle poverty than the promise of a review.

Nappies (Cost)

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking through the delivery of benefits to help families with the cost of nappies, in light of the reported increase in nappy theft linked to the cost of living crisis. (S6O-03109)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We want to give children

the best start in life and we are using our new social security powers to make that happen.

Our game-changing Scottish child payment, which is available only in Scotland, provides £25 a week to low-income families for each eligible child, and the best start grant pregnancy and baby payment helps with the expenses associated with pregnancy or with having a new child. Families are able to use those payments to best meet their needs, which could include buying nappies.

Subject to parliamentary approval, we will increase those payments—and indeed all social security payments—by 6.7 per cent from April 2024.

Monica Lennon (Labour, Central Scotland)

Notwithstanding the support that is available, we know that being unable to afford essential baby items is a reality for too many of our constituents. Nappy rationing is a horrible reality for many families and has a devastating impact on babies, children and parents.

The environmental benefits of reusable nappies are well known. They can also save families significant amounts of money, but the up-front costs can be a barrier. Scotland’s baby box gives families the opportunity to try reusable nappies, but the opt-in for that is quite low, at around 14 per cent. Will the cabinet secretary outline the ways in which the Government can come to understand that low uptake, raise awareness and make it easier for people to use such reusable products?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I begin by recognising Monica Lennon’s long-standing work on the issue. She is right to point out that the baby box raises awareness of the benefits of reusable nappies, as well as providing a nappy voucher. Provision of that voucher is intended to help families to start using reusable nappies free of charge and also signposts families to the Scottish Government’s Parent Club website, which highlights the benefits of using reusable nappies and provides helpful advice and tips about nappy use.

The James Hutton Institute has commissioned research into the barriers to re-using nappies. The final report is expected by the end of March and I will be happy to ensure that I, or other ministers, provide that information to Monica Lennon if she does not have it to hand when the report is published.

I also ask Ms Lennon to join our calls on the United Kingdom Government for an essentials guarantee. It is not acceptable in this day and age and in this country to have benefit levels that do not allow people to buy the bare essentials of life. Whether those are nappies or baby formula, they are exactly the products that people should not be rationing, which is why this Government has asked for an essentials guarantee. I am disappointed that we have had no reply or commitment on that from the UK Government.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes portfolio questions on social justice. There will be a brief pause before the next item of business in order to allow front bench speakers to change over.