Scottish Parliament, 30 May 2024

297 contributions from 72 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on work to extend the application of road equivalent tariff to northern isles ferry routes. (S6O-03508)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government remains committed to providing affordable ferry fares for the northern isles, and we have reduced fares where we have been able to do so. Significant fare reductions have been introduced on routes from Aberdeen to Orkney and Shetland, including a 20 per cent discount on cabins, a three-year fares freeze for islanders and a freeze on all fares in 2023-24.

Ferry fares policy, including RET, is currently being reviewed. The draft “Islands Connectivity Plan—Strategic Approach” paper, which was published for consultation on 1 February 2024, made a number of proposals on ferry fares policy, including RET. The online consultation concluded on 6 May 2024; responses are being collated and analysed; and further detail on next steps and timescales will be confirmed in due course.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The Scottish National Party introduced RET on Western Isles ferry routes in 2008. Since then, the excuses for not providing the same cheap fares on Pentland Firth routes have changed almost as often as transport ministers. Last year, the transport secretary advised me that, under the United Kingdom Subsidy Control Act 2022, the Government could not move forward, because of potential distortions of the market. The Scotland Office subsequently confirmed that the act allows devolved Administrations and local authorities to give subsidies that are tailored to local needs.

In addition, there has been an increase in ferry fares of 8.7 per cent from April this year. Is it not the case that Scottish ministers have been stringing the people of Orkney along for 16 years, with no intention of providing them with a fair deal on lifeline ferry routes across the Pentland Firth?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

That is not the case. Indeed, the three-year fares freeze for islanders and the freeze on all fares in 2023-24 represented a significant subsidy to and support for islanders at a time when the costs of operation were increasing as a result of increased wage costs and, as everybody will remember, eye-watering increases in energy costs. Fares were frozen at that level for a considerable period of time.

As for subsidy control and competition law, the Scotland Office can speak for itself, but I would not interpret its remarks as a get-out clause on subsidy control and competition matters. As Liam McArthur well knows, because he is an experienced member of this Parliament, competition law and subsidy control matters are very serious issues that can lead to legal challenge to the Government and severe consequences. I do not take such issues lightly, and they have been continuous over the period of time to which he refers.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I call Rhoda Grant for a brief supplementary question.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

Will the cabinet secretary confirm that state aid rules and competition law are no longer a barrier to having RET on northern isles routes? Will she also confirm that the people of Orkney and Shetland will enjoy the same subsidies as people on other islands?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Brexit is still happening, and it is not a “Get out of jail free” card for state aid issues. Indeed, as part of its agreements with the European Union, the UK Government was to continue to have competition law and subsidy control measures that would enable equivalence with regard to its previous activity. I think that there has been a misunderstanding by Rhoda Grant, and I am happy to explain things in more detail, at a later date, if she so chooses.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I will be grateful for concise questions and responses.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government when it will introduce legislation on climate targets, as announced by the net zero secretary in her ministerial statement on 18 April. (S6O-03509)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Scottish Government’s commitment to achieving net zero by 2045 is unwavering. However, we must now base our actions on the Climate Change Committee’s long-standing position that the interim 2030 target, set by Parliament on a cross-party basis, is beyond what can be achieved. As soon as is practicable, therefore, we will introduce legislation to ensure that our emissions pathway takes account of the latest advice. I ask members across the parties to collaborate with me on the issue to ensure that we follow the CCC’s advice.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I ask the cabinet secretary for clarity on what she meant by introducing “expedited legislation”, as she said in her statement to the chamber, to address the matters that the Climate Change Committee had raised and to ensure that our legislative framework better reflects the reality of long-term climate policy. Has she given up on her plan to introduce that legislation in an expedited manner? We are waiting for it now. Is it not the case that the longer the Scottish Government delays such legislation, the longer Scotland will go without a climate change plan and the longer we will have to wait for urgent action to tackle the climate emergency?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I understand Sarah Boyack’s point, but I absolutely confirm to her that the Government’s intention remains the same. Earlier in the week, I had a long evidence session on the subject at a meeting of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. I want the legislation to be introduced as soon as possible, and the bill’s scope to be as narrow as possible, not only to address the impediment that we currently face on progress towards meeting the 2030 target but to remove that impediment as soon as we can so that we can continue to make progress. That is important to me and, as I understand it, to Sarah Boyack.

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

Achieving full delivery of our climate policies will require full funding, yet the United Kingdom Government is to cut around 9 per cent—£1.5 billion—from Scotland’s capital budget. Given that the Climate Change Committee has called for partnership working between Scotland and Westminster, has the Scottish Government had any indication from the UK Government that cuts that undermine such climate commitments will be reversed?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Bob Doris is absolutely right to point out the significant costs of moving to net zero and how our ability to make the required investments is being undermined by the UK Government’s failure to inflation proof its budget. I firmly believe that, done correctly, investment in net zero represents an economic win. Indeed, the chair of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, Professor Graeme Roy, recently said:

“Doing nothing, not responding to the challenge of climate change, will be far more expensive and damaging to the public finances than investing in net zero ... it is simply not an option.”

I put that call to current and future UK Governments, and I urge them to reverse Scotland’s capital cut.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The cabinet secretary has made it quite clear that such legislation can be introduced, and that it should be done quickly. Given that it would have to be introduced and agreed to before November, will the cabinet secretary undertake to ensure that there will be sufficient time for not only the committee but the people of Scotland to consider the information contained in it?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I absolutely will. I reiterate what I said in response to Sarah Boyack: I want the legislation to be introduced as soon as is practicable. That will depend partly on the capacity of the Parliament’s committees, particularly that of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, which Edward Mountain convenes. I will be sure to engage with him on timetabling as part of the planning for the bill.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to support British Sign Language users across Scotland to access culture, in light of the publication of Scotland’s census 2022 report on language, which found that 117,300 people can use BSL. (S6O-03510)

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

We want to ensure that everybody, including British Sign Language users, can access and engage with cultural opportunities. In the BSL national plan, which was published just last year, we committed to supporting BSL users to take part in culture and the arts as participants, audience members and professionals. One example is Creative Scotland’s regularly funded organisation network; it includes Solar Bear, which works with deaf and hearing actors, theatre makers, artists and young people. In addition, targeted funding has directly supported the development of a deaf leader in the artistic director role.

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

The census revealed that BSL users now make up 2.2 per cent of the population, which is almost as many as the 2.5 per cent who can use Gaelic. Both Gaelic and BSL are national languages of Scotland; it is fantastic that Gaelic has dedicated funding streams to support artists who celebrate the language and the heritage, but BSL has a lower profile in the arts and culture sector. With that in mind, what more can be done to support great initiatives such as the Edinburgh deaf festival, which I hope to take my father to later this year?

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

I would certainly be keen to work with Karen Adam to ensure that the profile of the work around supporting those who use BSL is as high as possible. We should support all of Scotland’s languages. As Karen Adam has said, both Gaelic and BSL are national languages, and I offer to meet her to look at the specific initiatives and how we can work to support her objectives.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that local authorities are able to provide full-time schooling for children with complex additional support needs. (S6O-03511)

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

As members will be aware, local authorities have a duty under the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 to plan and provide support for children and young people with additional support needs, including those with complex additional support needs. Despite the challenging financial climate that we face, spending on additional support for learning reached a record high of £926 million in 2022-23. The Scottish Government also provides £11 million of funding each year to directly support pupils with complex additional support needs and services for children and families.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I recently had the pleasure of meeting my constituent Nikolas McLennan, aged nine, and his parents at my surgery. Nikolas has had no full-time education for 18 months despite the best efforts of the fabulous Drumpark primary school, which is in my constituency. This young man’s needs are very complex. He has global developmental delay and is unable to speak or eat, and his parents tell me that they are concerned that the lack of education has had a very detrimental impact on his overall wellbeing. Despite representations from me and others, the council has knocked back a request for a specialist placement in nearby Cumbernauld, where his needs could be met on a full-time basis. What further support can be given to children such as Nikolas to ensure that they receive the education that they deserve and are entitled to?

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

I thank the member for bringing his constituent’s case to my attention. First, I am extremely sorry to hear about his experience and that of his parents, particularly the challenges that he has had in accessing his right to education. Clearly, there might be specific healthcare considerations in this case. However, the education authority—in this case, as I understand it, that is North Lanarkshire Council—remains responsible for ensuring that the appropriate educational support is provided. To that end, I strongly encourage Nikolas’s parents to engage with North Lanarkshire Council in order to fully understand why the placement has been refused and what the next steps might be. The Enquire service, which is funded by the Scottish Government, can also provide them with further advice on the matter.

The legislation on the presumption of mainstreaming has very clear exceptions to allow children and young people to learn in a special school or in specialist units if that would best meet their needs. Although school placements are, of course, a matter for our councils, parents have the right to make a placing request to the school of their choice. Although I cannot interfere in this specific case, I would certainly welcome it if Fulton MacGregor could provide further details on it so that my officials can provide more detailed advice.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Again, I would be grateful for concise questions and responses.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to support cultural activities in the Cowdenbeath constituency. (S6O-03512)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government supports a range of cultural activities in communities across Scotland. We provide targeted support for culture through our funding of local authorities and public bodies, including Creative Scotland. Our funding for the youth music initiative has supported projects in Cowdenbeath that offer meaningful music-making opportunities to young people, helping to build their confidence and enhance their attainment. Projects that have been supported include Charanga, which is a digital resource that supports class teachers to deliver progressive music programmes, and Fischy Music, which helps pupils to develop their own music around a curricular topic.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Although the various projects that the cabinet secretary has referenced are welcome, it would nonetheless be fair to say that local groups would welcome greater support than they have had to date.

Looking to the immediate future, with many community events planned to mark the 40th anniversary of the miners strike, including in Ballingry on Saturday 15 June, what specific support does the Scottish Government intend to offer?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government recognises the significant impact that the miners strike continues to have in communities throughout Scotland. That is why we introduced legislation to provide a pardon to miners and other participants in the strike. We continue to call on the United Kingdom Government to undertake a full UK-wide public inquiry into the strike.

I appreciate that Ms Ewing wrote to the former Deputy First Minister about the anniversary event that is taking place in Ballingry in June. My colleague Tom Arthur, the Minister for Employment and Investment, has confirmed that he will be in attendance.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to take forward the recommendations in the Transport Scotland report, “‘There’s an app for that!’—Women’s Safety on Public Transport in Scotland”. (S6O-03513)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

It is unacceptable for anyone—especially women and girls—to feel unsafe travelling on public transport in Scotland, including on our railway. On 15 May, I met British Transport Police to discuss how we might prevent and reduce antisocial behaviour on Scotland’s railway. That included consideration of campaigns that promote and encourage the use of the Railway Guardian app. That app is operated by British Transport Police, which keeps under review how it might be enhanced. It can be downloaded via the British Transport Police website or via the App Store or the Google Play Store.

More generally, through the violence against women and girls policy forum, discussions continue about the role that technology can play in awareness raising, education and empowerment to create sustainable societal and behavioural change as part of a broader community safety approach in Scotland.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am pleased to hear that the cabinet secretary has spoken to British Transport Police. However, I am sure that she agrees that women should not have to rely on apps to ensure their safety on public transport. Given that, what progress is the Scottish Government making with regard to the changes that were identified in its own report in March last year, such as on transparent bus stops, improved network coverage and visible staffing—guards on trains, for example, which was backed by my friends in the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The visibility of staff is really important, and there has been an increase in the safety team that operates in and targets particular areas.

Graham Simpson is right to say that everybody has a responsibility. That includes men on trains. The “Speak up, interrupt” campaign, which was launched in July 2022, has had a good uptake. There is something about how we, as a society, collectively tackle antisocial behaviour. I was very pleased that, at my most recent stakeholder meeting, the White Ribbon UK campaign was very good at identifying how, generally, men and women—particularly men—can help in that regard.

I am happy to continue that discussion with Mr Simpson.

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

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress of the Sheriffhall roundabout project. (S6O-03514)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Given the large number of objections received following publication of draft orders, a public local inquiry was held from 31 January to 8 February 2023. The independent reporter submitted her conclusions and recommendations to the Scottish Government in October 2023. Those are under active consideration prior to advice being provided to, and a decision being made by, the Scottish ministers on whether to complete the statutory process.

Although we are keen for improvements to be delivered as soon as possible, the statutory right for individuals to have their say on proposals cannot be set aside.

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

The Sheriffhall roundabout is used heavily, and it regularly creates a bottleneck of traffic, to the detriment of my constituents and local businesses. There is huge public support for completion of the project, and there are serious concerns about the perceived delay. Although I appreciate the need to reduce our reliance on car transport to reach our net zero targets, does the Scottish Government agree that encouraging the use of public transport should not equal restricting improvements to road infrastructure?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

There needs to be both. We need to continue to improve road infrastructure for safety, asset management and effective traffic flow—for example, for potential bus lanes and car use.

The vision for our national transport strategy is that we will have

“a sustainable, inclusive, safe and accessible transport system helping deliver a healthier, fairer and more prosperous Scotland”.

Clearly, in respect of the investment hierarchy, transport options that focus on the need to travel sustainably and reduce inequalities are prioritised.

First Minister’s Question Time

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

This week, John Swinney spoke about the process of sanctioning Michael Matheson and said:

“In no other walk of life would this be judged to be acceptable.”

In what other walk of life would Michael Matheson still be in a job?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues relating to the case of Michael Matheson have been well exercised within Parliament, and Parliament came to its conclusions yesterday. I accept the conclusions that Parliament arrived at last night.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I am not surprised that John Swinney wants to move on as quickly as possible. He accepts the judgments that Parliament came to last night, but what the people of Scotland want to know is John Swinney’s judgment, because we have not heard that yet. He refused to support any sanction at all for his friend Michael Matheson. That MSP has now been banned from Parliament for 27 days, but he has not been suspended from the Scottish National Party by John Swinney.

People across Scotland think that Michael Matheson should have been sacked, because they would have been sacked in the same circumstances. It is one rule for the SNP and another for everyone else in Scotland. Not only has the SNP refused to support any sanction for Michael Matheson; incredibly, one SNP member of this Parliament said yesterday:

“we need more MSPs like Michael Matheson”—[Official Report, 29 May 2024; c 61.]

That is incredible, just as it is incredible that the First Minister is still defending his disgraced colleague.

Given that the First Minister refused to support the 27-day ban for Michael Matheson, what does John Swinney personally think would have been a suitable punishment for the disgraced former health secretary?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I fear that Douglas Ross was not listening to my earlier answer, because I said that I accepted the decision that Parliament arrived at last night.

The reason why I did not vote for that last night is that I felt that the process was tainted, for the reasons that I rehearsed at First Minister’s question time last week.

Yesterday, Parliament said, in relation to the points that I have raised—and Mr Ross voted for this—that the actions that led to the issues that caused me concern ran the risk of the committee report

“being open to bias and prejudice and the complaint being prejudged, thereby bringing the Parliament into disrepute.”

That is what I put to Parliament last week, and that is why I took the view that I could not support the sanction—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—because the process was tainted.

I make it clear now, for a third time, that I accept the decision that was made by Parliament yesterday.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

That is not clear, because the First Minister has just said that he does not support the sanction. Those were his words: “I don’t support the sanction.” Will he tell us what he would support? What sanction against Michael Matheson would John Swinney accept as being reasonable?

He has spoken about the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee and has spoken previously about his own correspondence to the convener of that committee. What John Swinney has not mentioned in all these deliberations is the correspondence that he himself received from one of his Perthshire constituents, which is included in the Parliament report that we discussed yesterday and that I have here today.

John Swinney’s constituent said that Michael Matheson’s £11,000 expenses claim was the equivalent of five years’ tax on their retirement income, four years of council tax payments or three years of energy bills. In the words of John Swinney’s Perthshire constituent, Michael Matheson

“removed that money from the public purse, for his own personal gain, in a false claim.”

That letter was sent to John Swinney in November. His constituent was calling for Michael Matheson to resign then, but John Swinney ignored his constituent so that he could protect his friend.

How can John Swinney keep his own integrity if he backs a man who has none?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

For the fourth time, I accept the decision that Parliament arrived at yesterday. That includes an acknowledgement by Parliament that the process that was undertaken by the committee risks bringing the Parliament into disrepute, and Mr Ross cannot escape what he voted for last night.

That means that Parliament has to consider how it exercises its responsibilities in accordance with the principles of natural justice. That is why I am glad that Parliament agreed last night that the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body should

“initiate an independent review of the Parliament’s complaints process to restore integrity and confidence in the Parliament and its procedures.”

That is what Parliament has decided to do.

I will continue to engage directly with my constituents, who have returned me to this Parliament on six occasions, on a regular basis and to serve them as faithfully as I have always done, and I will extend that to faithfully serving the country of which I have the privilege of being First Minister.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

John Swinney claimed that he is a safe pair of hands, but even he must accept the shambles that he has made of this scandal. Let us listen to what John Swinney previously said when Henry McLeish claimed expenses and then paid them back. John Swinney’s words—if the SNP members would like to listen—were:

“People around Scotland will be staggered by the amount of money that is involved. Crucially, the bond of trust that must exist between Scotland’s First Minister and the people has been broken.”

John Swinney finished by saying:

“For the good of the Scottish Parliament ... Mr McLeish should now resign.”

What happened to that John Swinney? Where has he gone? When it does not involve someone in the SNP, John Swinney tries to talk like a man of integrity. He demands resignations. He speaks of trust. He preaches about honesty. However, now that it is his SNP friend, he has abandoned the principles that he once had. What does John Swinney’s personal handling of the scandal say about his own character?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I remind Douglas Ross that, in 2018, the Conservative group in this Parliament—I appreciate that Mr Ross was not a member of the group at that time, as he had left the Scottish Parliament—voted against sanctions that were applied by the standards committee to one of Mr Ross’s members. So, Mr Ross has absolutely no credibility whatsoever in coming here and suggesting that my conduct or my actions have been in any way inappropriate. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We will hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In addition to that, the issues that I raised and went through at length last week in answering Mr Ross have now been endorsed by Parliament.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

But not by you.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross, you are aware that we should not be hearing any member other than the member who has been called to speak.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues that I raised have now been endorsed by Parliament.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Not by you.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross, I am going to ask you to apologise.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I apologise. I was simply saying that they have not been endorsed by John Swinney.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross, if this occurs again, I will be extremely frustrated and disappointed.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues that I raised last week have now been endorsed by the democratic national Parliament of Scotland, and a process that the corporate body will lead is now under way to address the issues and restore, in the words of the parliamentary motion,

“integrity and confidence in the Parliament and its procedures”,

which matter deeply to me as a member of this Parliament. For the fifth time, I indicate that I accept the conclusions that the Parliament came to yesterday.

The last thing that I am going to say to Mr Ross is this. I think that—this is pretty instructive—when Mr Ross goes through his sequence of questions and then eventually gets to the pouring out of the volume of personal abuse that he pours out, it tells us that Mr Ross has lost the argument, just as he has lost the argument throughout all of this, because he cannot do anything other than resort to nasty personal abuse. That is what Mr Ross contributes to this Parliament.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Yesterday, the Parliament agreed to suspend the former Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care, Michael Matheson, for attempting to misuse £11,000 of public money. Rather than defending Scots and protecting the integrity of Parliament, John Swinney chose to put his party before the country. Had Michael Matheson been at Westminster, he would now be facing a recall petition and, potentially, a by-election, but yet again, those in the Scottish National Party hold Scotland to a lower standard and believe that it is one rule for them and another rule for everyone else.

While John Swinney spent all his time this week managing his party and defending sleaze, waiting lists in Scotland reached a record high. More than 840,000 Scots are now stuck on a national health service waiting list, and more than one in 10 have been waiting more than a year. Why is John Swinney putting the SNP, not Scotland, first?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am the first to acknowledge that we face challenges in the national health service as a consequence—the issues have been well rehearsed in Parliament—of the aftermath of Covid and the implications that that has had in terms of the amount of time for which people are having to wait for treatment.

I am sorry for the amount of time for which people are having to wait. We are reducing the longest waits and making headway on that. With regard to the volume of activity in the national health service, the statistics this week indicate an increase in the level of activity in the NHS to begin to eat into those long waiting times, which I accept are far too long for too many people.

The Government is taking steps including investment of £30 million in the waiting times programme and the establishment of the national treatment centres, which are already making an impact and producing some of that welcome level of increased activity, combined with the focus in the national health service on tackling the longest waits. Those are the measures that the Government is taking forward to ensure that we tackle the legitimate issue that Mr Sarwar raises with me.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Waiting lists in Scotland are going up, not down. John Swinney has to get his head out of the sand, because every day that he spends putting the SNP before Scotland has consequences for our NHS, and for patients such as Natalie from Glasgow.

In 2017, Natalie had emergency surgery for a brain tumour. In 2021, she began to feel symptoms, specifically pain around her eye. She has a tumour around her optical nerve that is causing her pain and pushing on her eye socket. In December last year, she was told that she would need surgery, and that part of her skull would need to be removed and not replaced. She has heard nothing since then. She has a brain tumour, and she has heard nothing for almost six months. She has been told that she could lose her sight if it is not treated.

This morning, Natalie told me:

“That just makes the anxiety and the concerns worse. I’m worried about the pain being an indication that the tumour is getting worse, but I have no way of knowing. I’m in the dark and feel completely alone during all of this.”

Does the First Minister understand that patients like Natalie should be his priority, rather than defence of a failed health secretary who attempted to misuse public money?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I say to Natalie that I understand entirely the anxiety that she faces, and I am sorry that she has not heard anything since December. If Mr Sarwar, in the aftermath of today’s exchanges, would like to advise me of the details, I will take the issue up, as he will understand I would do.

I say also that patients like Natalie are my focus. I am spending huge amounts of my time as First Minister focusing on the real and legitimate concerns of people in Scotland about our public services. I said to Parliament last week that my priorities would address the challenges in our public services, and that that would be one of the four major themes, along with eradicating child poverty, the transition to net zero and the stimulation of economic growth.

Those reforms and developments, and progression in our public services will be, and are, at the heart of my priorities. That is what the Cabinet was talking about in our meeting this week, and we will continue to do that. I assure Mr Sarwar, and l assure Natalie, that the concerns of people in Scotland about getting access to healthcare treatment when they need it, at the earliest possible opportunity, will be fundamental to the priorities that I take forward on behalf of the people of Scotland.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

We hear the same answer week after week, month after month and year after year, but things keep getting worse for people right across the country. I have heard what the First Minister has said, but it does not change the fact that he has spent the past week fighting for Michael Matheson when he should have been fighting for patients such as Natalie and hundreds of thousands of Scots like her.

After 17 years of this SNP Government, one in six Scots is stuck on an NHS waiting list. Our NHS desperately needs change. In 1948, Labour created our NHS; in 1997, we rescued our NHS; and on 5 July, the 76th birthday of our NHS, we will begin the process of rescuing it again.

However, that also needs change in Scotland, because the priorities of the SNP Government are all wrong. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Why is John Swinney more interested in defending Michael Matheson than in defending our NHS? Why is John Swinney putting his party before the country? Why is John Swinney failing NHS staff and patients every single day?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I reiterate that my primary concern is to make sure that people such as Natalie receive the treatment that they want at the earliest possible opportunity, to address their anxiety and acute health requirements. If Mr Sarwar gives me the details, I will attend to that after First Minister’s questions.

However, some of the rest of what Mr Sarwar went on to say is just a little bit hollow. On Wednesday morning, the Labour shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, said:

“The NHS is in crisis in every part of the United Kingdom because decisions that are taken in Westminster don’t just affect England, but Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.”

Earlier in the month, he said that

“all roads do lead back to Westminster”

because of the austerity that we have suffered for 14 years.

In relation to that austerity programme, Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has indicated that the Labour Party, if it is elected to office, will not increase income tax, national insurance, corporation tax or VAT, and that it has accepted very strict borrowing limits within very strict fiscal and tax rules, and squeezed spending budgets. That amounts to austerity on stilts from any incoming Labour Government.

If that was not bad enough, Wes Streeting said yesterday that he will

“hold the door wide open”

for the private sector in the national health service. He went on to say:

“We will go further than New Labour ever did. I want the NHS to form partnerships with the private sector that goes beyond just hospitals.”

Mr Sarwar should not give me that stuff about the anniversary of the national health service, because Labour is preparing to sell us out on austerity and the national health service, and cannot be trusted to deliver for the people of Scotland.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

This week, the First Minister gave clarity on one issue, when he called on the United Kingdom Government to recognise the state of Palestine and end arms sales to Israel. However, the same clarity is needed on the Scottish Government’s devolved responsibilities in relation to Israel’s genocidal action against Palestine.

The United Nations has published a list of about 90 companies that it considers to be complicit in the illegal settlements that Israel has been constructing on Palestinian territory in the west bank. In November, my colleague Ross Greer asked the former First Minister to agree that those companies should be banned from receiving public sector grants and contracts in Scotland from within the devolved Government’s responsibilities. The then First Minister agreed in principle that no company that is profiting from occupation should profit in Scotland, too.

It is now seven months and tens of thousands of deaths later, including those of at least 13,000 children. In the west bank, hundreds of Palestinians have been killed by Israeli soldiers and extremists, but the Scottish Government has not yet taken action to ban companies that are on the UN’s list of complicit companies from receiving grants. Will the First Minister send a clear signal today by immediately banning those companies from receiving grants and other support from the Scottish Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I acknowledge the seriousness of the issues that Mr Harvie raises with me. The other day, I indicated that there should be an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, that the hostages who have been taken should be returned to their loved ones—to whom they should have been returned a long time ago—and that arms sales to Israel should stop. As Mr Harvie correctly said, I went on to say that I believe that the United Kingdom should recognise the state of Palestine as an independent state. That is long overdue, and it would be a contribution towards trying to stabilise the situation in the middle east. I hope that Mr Harvie takes from that the direction of my thinking on the matter and my desire to do as much as I can to help to resolve the situation from our position.

I will consider carefully the points that Mr Harvie has raised about any support for companies that are involved in this activity. Our enterprise agencies have appropriate safeguards in place to ensure that any funding provided is used only for the specific purpose for which it is intended. From Mr Harvie’s question, I suspect that he wants me to extend beyond that protection. On that matter, I would have to take great care to ensure that we had a legal justification for so doing. If Mr Harvie and Mr Greer would care to provide me with the material about which they are concerned, I will investigate and determine whether the Government can do more. I will, of course, update Parliament on those investigations.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I strongly agree with every element of what the First Minister said that the UK Government should do, but he is not yet providing clarity on what the Scottish Government should do within its powers. I mentioned the companies on the list that the UN deems complicit in illegal Israeli settlements in the west bank. The First Minister might have been moving on to answer in relation to arms companies that are provided with grants and other forms of financial support by the Scottish Government. He is right that those grants do not support the production of munitions, but that simply is not enough. If we contribute to building a bigger bomb factory, we do not get to say that we have not funded the production of the bombs. Even since 7 October, Raytheon, BAE Systems and Leonardo have all received eye-watering sums from the Scottish Government’s agency, Scottish Enterprise.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I must have a question, Mr Harvie.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

This is in a time when the world is recoiling in revulsion at the appalling attacks, including the most recent attacks against Palestinians sheltering in Rafah. It is shocking and inexplicable that, at the same time—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Harvie, can I have a question, please?

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

—as the Scottish Government is calling for an end to arms sales, it is directly funding those manufacturers. Will the First Minister change that policy immediately?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I take seriously the point that Mr Harvie puts to me. I do not think that the analogy that he strikes about the construction of a weapons factory is a particularly fair analogy for the support that we put in place, but I will go away and look at that carefully.

The point that I was making in my earlier answer is that there will be a legal basis for us to apply safeguards in relation to the issuing of grants, but we have to have a legal basis for saying, for matters that are not related to the Israel-Gaza conflict, that we are not providing a grant. That is not me being pedantic—that is simply the legal basis on which the Government has to act. We must always act within the law, and I must take the views of the law officers deadly seriously in the actions that we take. If Mr Harvie would care to correspond with me in more detail, I will happily explore the issues that he raises, which I recognise are important and sensitive to people in our country.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the potential impact on the health service in Scotland of Home Office data showing that health and care worker visa applications are 76 per cent lower in January to April this year, compared with last year. (S6F-03174)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Workers from overseas are filling vital roles supporting people who rely on them for the care that they provide. This Government values people who have chosen to come to Scotland to make a positive contribution to our public services. Stopping people from bringing dependants to the United Kingdom is short-sighted and risks exacerbating shortages in the care sector. It is wrong that those changes have been driven by arbitrary decisions to reduce numbers rather than the needs of our public services and communities. It is therefore very concerning that the number of health and care worker visa applications has fallen, as Clare Haughey has recounted.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

The impact that the UK Government’s cruel immigration policies are having on Scotland’s health and social care sector is a substantial concern. Will the First Minister confirm that the Scottish National Party, both in Holyrood and in Westminster, will ensure that Scotland remains a welcoming and fair country for health and care staff to live and work, particularly those from overseas?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I give Clare Haughey that assurance. The question that Clare Haughey puts to me highlights some significant issues. Mr Sarwar completely legitimately raised an issue about national health service waiting times with me today. One of the challenges that we face in the health service is the congestion in our hospitals that is created by delayed discharge. One of the issues with delayed discharge is that we do not have enough people able to deliver care packages in our communities and, as Clare Haughey indicates in her question, some of the supply of those workers is being eroded by the decisions that have been taken on immigration by the United Kingdom Government. There is a very direct effect on our ability to deliver sustainable health services because we simply do not have an available workforce to enable us to do that. As members will know, we have a very low level of unemployment in Scotland today.

The issue that Clare Haughey raises may be about immigration, but it has a direct effect on the delivery of public services in Scotland. I assure Clare Haughey and Parliament that the Government will do all that we can to address the issue in order to ensure that we have adequate supplies of people to deliver social care and other healthcare activities in our country.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reports of a National Crime Agency warning about synthetic opioids being linked to rising numbers of deaths. (S6F-03185)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government is working closely with Public Health Scotland, as we are very concerned about the growing threat posed by synthetic opioids and, in particular, the increased appearance of nitazines in the drug supply. Public Health Scotland has been issuing alerts via RADAR—rapid action drug alerts and response—to healthcare staff and the public to highlight the increased dangers associated with nitazines. That alert was last updated in March 2024.

The Scottish Drugs Forum launched a public campaign in December 2023 to spread awareness and to reduce risk. We are working with third sector delivery partners and with directors of public health to ensure that health boards are prepared at the local level. We are meeting regularly with the United Kingdom Government and other devolved Governments to ensure that we are aligned in our activities.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

There have been almost 50 known deaths in Scotland linked to synthetic opioids, and it is inevitable that more people will die. Just last week, there was a mass overdose in Paisley. The terrifying potency of these man-made narcotics cannot be overstated. The death and devastation that they cause nails the lazy lie that there is any safe way to consume them. Does the First Minister agree that it is entirely right that they remain categorised as class A substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have quite a bit of sympathy with the depth of concern that Mr Findlay raises and expresses to Parliament, because the potency and devastating impact of synthetic opioids is difficult to fathom—

Mr Findlay will appreciate that a combination of activity is necessary to tackle the threat. It is a combination of three elements: first, there is awareness raising, which Mr Findlay has contributed to in raising the issue with me at First Minister’s questions; secondly, an effective policing response is needed to counter the supply of synthetic opioids; thirdly, there is the whole process of harm reduction that the Government is engaged with. I assure Mr Findlay that the Government is deeply engaged in activity on those three grounds to address what I recognise is a significant threat.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether teacher numbers should be maintained, in light of the reported concerns of many parents, pupils and school staff in Glasgow. (S6F-03176)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We remain fully committed to protecting teacher numbers and are offering local authorities £145.5 million in this year’s budget for that purpose. That funding will allow councils to protect teacher numbers in order to support children’s education. I hope that our local government partners share that goal. The Government remains determined to close the poverty-related attainment gap and to reduce teacher workload, and I do not believe that those aims will be achieved by councils employing fewer teachers in our schools. We are currently in discussion with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and wish to work with our local authority partners to deliver our shared commitments on education.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the First Minister for that answer, but I am afraid that it will be cold comfort for teachers, parents and pupils in Glasgow, because the reality is that his Scottish National Party and Green colleagues there are slashing teacher numbers, which impacts the poorest and most disadvantaged pupils the most. It is not the first time that that has happened on the First Minister’s watch. As one young person said at the most recent rally against the cuts, the First Minister owes it to young people to intervene after his decision in the 2020 exams fiasco resulted in the downgrading of the poorest pupils.

Today, the First Minister has talked about Parliament endorsements. On 15 May, Parliament sided with teachers, parents and pupils and endorsed calls on the Government to intervene and protect job losses. What exactly is the First Minister’s Government doing to deliver the will of Parliament, and when will the jobs be saved?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Obviously, those are matters for individual local authorities to take forward. That is the constitutional arrangement in this country, which ensures that the delivery of education is a matter within the competence of local authorities.

Pam Duncan-Glancy asked me what the Government is doing to help with that situation: the Government is offering £145.5 million to local authorities to protect teacher numbers. That is what the Government is doing.

I have to say that I find Pam Duncan-Glancy’s concerns about this rather difficult to accept. If the Labour Party had its budget proposals accepted in the city of Glasgow—£30 million cuts in education on Glasgow City Council—that could have meant the loss of up to 650 teachers. The Labour Party’s proposition to people in this election is to prolong austerity—that is what Labour will carry on with. There will be no new money coming along the track, there will be prolonged austerity and Labour will continue where the Tories have left off. When the Labour Party is in council chambers around the country, it wants to reduce teacher numbers by 650. That is just unacceptable. The Scottish Government is doing what it can to support local authorities to protect teacher numbers, and we will engage with local authorities to enable that.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

In 2021, the SNP promised not merely to maintain teacher numbers but to deliver an additional 3,500 teachers and classroom assistants. However, the latest data shows that there are 250 fewer teachers than there were when that promise was made. Will the First Minister confirm that, like the laptops, bikes and free meals, that is another broken promise?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

You know, when they were giving out brass necks, they gave them out in abundance to that part of the chamber—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Since 2021, two significant factors have undermined the public finances in the United Kingdom. The first has been the rampant inflation that has eroded the value of public sector budgets. Although inflation is lower today than it was a year ago, prices are still very much higher because of the effect of double-digit inflation—the first time that we have that in the United Kingdom for over 40 years.

The second thing that has happened is that the cost of investing in and supporting our public services has gone through the roof, because of the mistakes that were made by Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng in that ridiculous statement to the House of Commons. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have to say to Liam Kerr that it is preposterous for the Conservatives to come here and demand that I do more and spend more money when the consequence of their management of the United Kingdom economy has been so damaging to Scotland’s interests.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We now move to constituency and general supplementaries.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

The Scottish National Party Scottish Government’s continued investment in our rail services is very welcome, with ScotRail being brought into public ownership, action being taken to drive down ticket prices and investment being made in new infrastructure. The recently opened Levenmouth rail link will bring a transformation to the area and to many of my constituents, improving access to leisure, economic, employment and educational opportunities.

Does the First Minister agree that the next United Kingdom Government must follow the Scottish Government’s lead and start to invest properly in the UK rail network while returning services to public hands?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I was delighted to have the opportunity yesterday, with local members Mr Torrance and my colleague Jenny Gilruth, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, to be present at the opening of Levenmouth rail link. It is a wonderful project, which has come about because of tenacious campaigning by the Levenmouth rail campaign, which garnered support on a cross-party basis for a new rail link. It will connect the communities around Leven to the rail network, opening up educational, social and economic opportunities for that community and also opening up that community as a place to visit and a destination on the rail network. It is a superb investment, and I congratulate everyone involved in the Levenmouth rail link.

I would certainly want the investment and resources to be available to ensure that we can undertake other projects of that character around the country, but that will only come if there is a stimulation to capital investment, which is absolutely and desperately required after 14 years of austerity.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

On Friday 1 December 2023 at 10.25 pm, an explosion ripped through homes on Baberton Mains Avenue, tragically resulting in the loss of one life. Some six months on, families living on the avenue and neighbouring streets relive the horror of that night every day when going about their daily lives. Families whose homes were destroyed are none the wiser regarding the future of their homes. No visible or perceivable progress has been made, and the site looks much the same as it did on that bleak morning of 2 December. Last week, one resident described the situation between the City of Edinburgh Council and insurance companies as being like a Mexican stand-off.

Will the First Minister meet me and the families and do all that he can to influence that stalemate and move things on for those who have been left in limbo?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am very happy to agree to that. I was born and brought up in Edinburgh, not far from Baberton, so I know the area very well. I saw those scenes with absolute horror and I can observe from afar the horror that people there have suffered. I am happy to meet Sue Webber and her constituents on the matter.

There is a question that may be lurking about where statutory investigations are regarding the incident, which may be contributing to delays—but I am probably saying more at this stage than I should, without delving into the detail. I will look closely at the matter, and I would be very happy to meet to discuss it.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Yesterday, Reform Scotland published its “Computing the Future” report on the state of computer science teachers. It found that one in eight schools is without a dedicated computer science teacher, which is denying 32,000 pupils access to that resource. It found that there had been a 25 per cent drop in the number of computer science teachers over 15 years, which represents a denial of opportunity to young people and a brake on growth in that critical sector.

Four years on from the publication of the “Scottish Technology Ecosystem Review”, Mark Logan, its author, stated to the Education, Children and Young People Committee yesterday that trying to drive reform in the system, especially with Education Scotland, had been like dragging a heavily sedated bull elephant backwards through cold treacle. Referring to the “Computing the Future” report, he said that it all adds up to a bad static picture, and it sounded to him like a crisis.

Does the First Minister agree with the Scottish Government’s chief entrepreneur?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I take very seriously what the chief entrepreneur says, and I understand that Mark Logan has been working on the implementation of the recommendations and trying to make progress. If he needs a bit more assistance from the First Minister, I will certainly offer it.

I know that the Deputy First Minister will be keen to support him in his efforts, because pupils accessing computer science education is vital as an investment in the future of Scotland. Work is being delivered to establish new courses with the University of Aberdeen, if my memory serves me right, to take forward those priorities. I am very happy, as will be the Deputy First Minister, to engage with Mark Logan on that important question.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

Thanks to Westminster economic mismanagement, businesses across Scotland, including in my constituency, Falkirk East, are facing pressures, including extra costs and red tape due to Brexit. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact of the United Kingdom Government’s new post-Brexit border checks on business in Scotland—checks that are costly, unnecessary and supported by Tories and Labour alike?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have touched on some of the implications of Brexit already today in response to Clare Haughey’s question about the availability of people.

Michelle Thomson is absolutely correct. I cannot speak to a business in the country that is not suffering from the effects of Brexit, whether that is about the availability of staff, the cost of doing business or the loss of opportunity, because it is just so much more difficult to advance some of those questions.

The most recent information that I have is that the National Audit Office undertook a report that estimated that UK traders were facing additional costs of £469 million per year. That is on top of annual costs of £7.5 billion since 2019 for completing customs declarations on UK-European Union trade. That is the scale of the competitive disadvantage that has been inflicted by the folly of Brexit, which, unfortunately, is supported by both the Conservative and Labour parties and which the Scottish National Party would want to address by establishing Scotland’s independent membership of the European Union.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Last weekend in Oregon, Josh Kerr from Edinburgh Athletic Club smashed the British mile record in an astonishing 3 minutes 45 seconds, eclipsing the great Steve Cram’s record, which he had held for 39 years. Josh is now ranked sixth in the world all-time list. He is already the world 1,500m champion and the world indoor 3,000m champion, and he holds an Olympic bronze medal.

Behind Josh, from Giffnock North Athletics Club, was Neil Gourley, running an astonishing 3 minutes 47, and Jake Wightman, from Edinburgh AC, a former 1,500m world champion, running 3 minutes 47.

Does the First Minister agree that those athletes, along with female counterparts such as Laura Muir, Jemma Reekie, Eilish McColgan and Erin Wallace, are an inspiration to future sportsmen and women? Will he join me in wishing them well at the upcoming Olympic games in Paris?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am absolutely delighted to do so and to pay tribute to the astonishing achievements of all the individuals whom Mr Whittle has mentioned, because they are utterly and totally inspiring.

I have to say to Mr Whittle that they will be a great deal faster than both him and me, if I may say so. They are certainly a great deal faster than I was when running through the centre of Edinburgh at the ungodly hour at which I was running this morning.

I pay warm tribute to them. They are an encouragement to us all to exercise—perhaps not as fast as they are able to exercise and compete—and to take due care of ourselves to ensure our own physical fitness. I am happy to associate myself with Brian Whittle’s comments and to encourage all the athletes in the forthcoming competitions.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

If the First Minister agrees that there is, indeed, a climate emergency, why is the Government’s biggest capital project in Glasgow—rebuilding a 50-year-old motorway viaduct—now estimated at a staggering cost of more than £150 million, with no consultation with my constituents, while it cuts the city’s public transport budget to zero?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There will be essential projects that have to be undertaken to ensure public safety and to guarantee that we have the appropriate level of connectivity in our communities. Obviously, there is a debate to be had about the merits of individual projects, but the Government has an obligation to work with local authorities in a spirit of partnership to agree the infrastructure improvements that are necessary to ensure that we have connectivity in our country.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Can the First Minister clarify whether the permanent secretary’s guidance concerning the United Kingdom election on 4 July will result in the delaying of the announcement on the small vessel replacement programme?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In an answer to a parliamentary question that I gave on Tuesday, I included the guidance that has been given to me by the permanent secretary. Regrettably, from my perspective, that means that a significant amount of the explanation of the Government’s programme will have to wait until after the United Kingdom election has been concluded.

We do not anticipate that an announcement on the small vessel replacement programme will be made before the end of the pre-election period, as consideration of the business case by ministers remains on-going, but if there is any alteration to that view, I will share that with Parliament.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will now be a short suspension to allow those who are leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions, and the portfolio on this occasion is social justice. I remind members that if they wish to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak buttons during the relevant question. There is quite a bit of interest in asking supplementaries, so I make the usual appeal for questions not to come in four parts with a long preamble, and for responses to be similarly brief.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what steps it is taking to address child poverty. (S6O-03500)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Eradicating child poverty in Scotland is the First Minister’s, and the Government’s, top priority. We are providing a range of support to families, including our game-changing Scottish child payment, which—as statistics that were published this week show—was benefiting more than 329,000 children by the end of March. We have also funded childcare, free bus travel for under-22s and free school meals for more than 277,000 children.

Modelling that was published in February estimates that our policies will keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty in 2024-25. On 4 June, I will provide an update to Parliament on the progress that has been made on tackling child poverty.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

Given that around a quarter of children in Falkirk, in my Central Scotland region, are living in poverty, according to the most recent statistics that have been published, what specific steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure, through its strategy, that take-up of social security benefits is maximised and that automatic access to benefits is advanced?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Gillian Mackay is right to point out the importance of automation. I am pleased to see that the statistics for the Scottish child payment also demonstrate the automated payments that are now being made for best start grants, for example. Those came in before the Scottish child payment was in place, and we have now enabled aspects of the application forms and the payments to be automated to ensure that people can get what they are entitled to. I am determined to see what more we can do on that over the years ahead.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

There are a couple of supplementaries.

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

Last week, Professor Danny Dorling told the Social Justice and Social Security Committee that Europe is paying close attention to the Scottish child payment as an example of how policy can radically reduce child poverty levels.

Given how Barnett consequentials work, would the cabinet secretary encourage the United Kingdom Government to do likewise—taking an evidence-based approach to tackling child poverty and removing the many barriers from Westminster that have an impact in that regard?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I thank Bob Doris for bringing to my attention Professor Dorling’s remarks. I had the pleasure of meeting Professor Dorling when I was down in London a few months ago, which I found very insightful.

The member is right to point to the fact that the Scottish child payment is available only in Scotland. If a UK Government of whatever persuasion was to follow our lead and ensure that it had a universal credit and welfare system that actually met people’s essential needs, which is why we have asked for an essentials guarantee to be introduced at UK level, some of the changes that could be made through that would allow the Scottish Government to receive Barnett consequentials in that area. We should think about what more this Parliament could do if we were funded effectively to eradicate child poverty.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

One Parent Families Scotland has found that

“39% of children in single parent families live in poverty”,

but the delivery of 1,140 hours of free childcare is not sufficient to enable single parents to work, as it covers only the school day. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that the provision of 1,140 hours of childcare is delivered more flexibly in order to meet the needs of families, in particular single mothers?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I had an interesting discussion with One Parent Families Scotland on that matter and other matters when I met its representatives recently. I point out to Foysol Choudhury that the Government is exceptionally proud of our record on delivering childcare. Since the Scottish National Party came to power, we have seen a doubling in the hours of free childcare that are available.

Under the current system, it is up to local authorities to ensure that there is flexibility to be able to meet the needs of the public in their area. I am sure that the member would wish to take up the matter with the City of Edinburgh Council, as I presume that that is the area in question, or with whichever councils are involved, to ensure that they are delivering for everybody, including single parents.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what funding it provided to East and South Ayrshire councils in 2023-24 for discretionary housing payments. (S6O-03501)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The Scottish Government provided more than £2.6 million to East Ayrshire Council for discretionary housing payments in 2023-24, which supported more than 3,400 households. South Ayrshire Council received more than £1.7 million, which supported more than 2,000 households.

In 2024-25, the Scottish Government has increased the total discretionary housing payment budget by £6.8 million. The extra money that the Scottish Government provided through discretionary housing payments is just one of the actions that we are taking to help households across the country through the cost of living crisis.

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

Statistics that were released this week show that more than 135,000 awards were delivered across Scotland for discretionary housing payments in 2023-24, with more than 4,000 in East Ayrshire and more than 3,300 in South Ayrshire. As they are our main tool for mitigating harmful United Kingdom Government welfare policies, such as the bedroom tax, can the minister comment on the importance of discretionary housing payments as a means to prevent vulnerable households being driven into homelessness in Scotland? How can we promote their uptake?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Discretionary housing payments are a vital tool in reducing poverty, safeguarding tenancies and preventing homelessness. That is why we have invested more than £613 million since 2017. Discretionary housing payments are just one action that we are taking to help households across the country to mitigate more than a decade of austerity from Westminster Governments. We are investing around £3 billion a year in policies that protect people as far as possible in the cost of living crisis. That includes an extra £6.8 million in the budget for discretionary housing payments in 2024-25 to directly mitigate punitive policies such as the bedroom tax.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Question 3 is from Paul O’Kane, who joins us remotely.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address food poverty, in light of the recent figures published by the Trussell Trust showing that its network distributed 262,400 emergency food parcels in the last 12 months. (S6O-03502)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

It is not acceptable for anyone to have to rely on emergency food parcels.

This week, I visited the Courtyard Pantry Enterprise in Glasgow, where I saw at first hand how trusted community organisations can support families to access healthy, affordable foods and refer them to financial advice services.

Scottish Government policy choices have helped to slow the pace of demand for food parcels in Scotland, and Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom not to see an increase in the number of parcels distributed through the Trussell Trust network last year. However, we must work with any incoming UK Government to urgently fix the issues with universal credit that are driving food bank use.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Last year, the cabinet secretary published a nine-point plan to end food bank use, but the Trussell Trust stated unequivocally that it was “disappointed” with the lack of ambition in the plan and that it failed to show the “requisite leadership and urgency”.

I hear the cabinet secretary saying that the Scottish Government would want to work with an incoming Government, so I am sure that she will agree that an incoming Labour Government—which would prioritise ensuring that work pays and that we support the stabilisation of the economy so that food prices go down—would be very welcome.

How does she respond to those comments by the Trussell Trust? When will she return to her nine-point plan and ensure that it is delivered with the ambition that is required?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I am happy to work with any UK Government of any persuasion that has the best interests of the people of Scotland at its heart. That is why I am disappointed to note that Paul O’Kane’s party does not seek to change any of the Tory austerity welfare policies that we have.

Given the level of concern from trade unions on some of the employability and fair work measures that may or may not happen if Labour is elected, I wait to see what happens in reality.

It is important to point to the fact that the cash-first approach that the Scottish Government has developed has been welcomed by many people within anti-poverty charities and organisations. I was pleased to see how that work has helped people; it is not just about establishing more dignity for people but about ensuring that we support them out of poverty.

I hope that Paul O’Kane will join me in recognising the Trussell Trust’s call for a UK Government to establish an essentials guarantee—something that the Scottish Government has been calling for for some time. [ [Applause .]

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I call Bill Kidd for a supplementary question.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank my colleagues for the applause. [Laughter.]

Will the cabinet secretary comment on the Fraser of Allander Institute data that shows the significant impact that the Scottish child payment has already had on food bank usage in Scotland?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The latest research demonstrates the impact of the Scottish child payment in assisting people who are struggling to feed their families. It has successfully reduced food bank usage for specific types of households. The families of more than 329,000 under-16s were benefiting from the Scottish child payment at the end of March. However, I absolutely recognise that we need to do more, because any family or individual who goes to a food bank is in crisis, and we should not be at that point in this day and age. That is why we have a social security system that is here to deliver for the people of Scotland. I can only hope that, at some point, we have a UK Government that does the same in relation to its responsibilities for social security.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I remind members of my voluntary entry in the register of members’ interests.

To ask the Scottish Government when it anticipates the first payment of employment injury assistance will be made. (S6O-03503)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Scottish Government launched a consultation on employment injury assistance on 30 April. The consultation, which closes on 24 June, will provide vital insights into how employment injury assistance can better meet the needs of disabled people in Scotland in the future and is an important first step in the longer-term reform of the United Kingdom industrial injuries scheme in Scotland.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Four years after the devolution of the benefit, the Government has finally launched this consultation paper, in which it admits that there is widespread concern and in which it admits that this has been a low priority. The new First Minister has promised us more concrete actions and fewer strategy documents, and yet here we are with yet another consultation paper. Does the cabinet secretary not understand that those former professional footballers with dementia, those firefighters with cancer, those workers across occupations who are suffering from long Covid, and all those women workers with industrial injury and disease contracted through their work expect more understanding, demand more urgency and deserve more concrete actions from this Government?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Women Against State Pension Inequality deserve urgent action, and the women who required equal pay deserved urgent action. I am not entirely sure where Richard Leonard was when those issues were being discussed, particularly those in Glasgow.

It is important that we develop a system that is done in consultation. That is exactly why we have a social security system in Scotland that is working effectively. One of the challenges is that, since the war, successive Governments of every colour have led us to a UK industrial injury scheme that consists of warehouses of paper forms. That scheme is not fit for purpose, nor has it been changed by any Government. I appreciate that there is frustration about the need for change; it is unfortunate that people have not seen that change under successive UK Governments for decades.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Based on what the cabinet secretary just said, will she confirm that transferring the current system to Scotland must be the emphasis and that it is a major task? Will she also point out, or ask Richard Leonard, where the money for all the extra benefits that he is looking for would come from?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

John Mason knows—and I hope that many members across the chamber understand—that our position has always been to have a safe and secure transition of benefits from the UK Government to a system here in Scotland. That is all done based on dignity, fairness and respect.

The member is quite right to point out that we need to ensure that the transfer is done safely. That is exactly why—again, we go back to the point on the urgency of a consultation, which will be considered by Government—we need to take account of the changes that people want to see. The existing scheme has seen no changes since it was introduced in the post-war era.

Cost will be a factor, but it is important that it is only one factor. We need to ensure that we deliver a system that provides dignity, particularly for those the system has failed to date.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

The availability of expertise on industrial diseases has been raised as an issue for any potential future Scottish employment injury assistance advisory council. Will the cabinet secretary confirm what scoping has been carried out to see whether enough experts in that field are available in Scotland?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

As briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The member raises an important practical point that we need to look at. It is disappointing that the United Kingdom Government has ensured that we—the Scottish Government—cannot ask the current council for advice, which means that we need to look for other approaches, and we will do that through the consultation.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that disabled people who receive Scottish social security benefits are treated lawfully, in light of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s reported investigation into the treatment of some disabled benefits claimants by the United Kingdom Department for Work and Pensions. (S6O-03504)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We have very serious concerns over the UK Government’s treatment of people applying for disability benefits, so I welcome the investigation. The Scottish Government has taken relevant public sector equality duties into account throughout the development of disability assistance, which has been assured through processes of drafting and publishing comprehensive equality impact assessments.

The Government is committed to undertaking such assessments with every new policy that impacts on disabled people. Scotland’s social security system is designed on the principles of dignity, fairness and respect. Those are the values of this Government and of the people of Scotland.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Will the cabinet secretary expand on specific measures that are in place to ensure that the assessment processes for Scottish social security benefits adhere to those principles of fairness, dignity and respect for disabled claimants? How do those measures differ from those used by the UK Department for Work and Pensions?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I was pleased to hear about the real difference that the new system in Scotland is making when I was on one of my most recent visits to Forgewood community centre in Motherwell. There, I heard directly from carers and from people who they care for about the difference that it makes having no private sector assessments as part of the system and having a system that has been designed with people to maximise the benefits that they are entitled to, given that social security is a human right. That compassionate approach is in stark contrast to the DWP’s approach.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

It is clear that our social security and benefits ambitions in Scotland have a quite different foundation from those elsewhere on these islands, but we must continue to improve. What work is being undertaken to ensure increased and improved understanding of chronic but very variable conditions across our social security system, so that people do not have their needs judged based on their best days but are instead supported to cope and thrive on their worst days?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Maggie Chapman raises an important point that was raised by many people when we were designing child disability payment and adult disability payment. They felt that the application system and the assessment process did not work for people with variable conditions. That is exactly why we went through a consultation process to design our current system with people who have that experience, to ensure that the application form and the way in which decisions are taken are the best that they possibly can be for those people. It is clear that the system is still new, and we will have more to learn, but we are determined to do that.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Question 6 has been withdrawn.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I apologise to members for my late arrival.

To ask the Scottish Government how its rural affordable homes for key workers fund will help tackle island depopulation. (S6O-03506)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I recognise the importance of good-quality affordable homes to attracting and retaining people in our rural and island communities, including for key workers. This year, we will invest nearly £600 million in affordable homes across Scotland, including through the demand-led rural and islands housing fund and the key workers fund, from which four affordable homes have already been approved in Orkney.

Between 2016-17 and 2022-23, through the wider affordable housing supply programme, more than 10,000 affordable homes have been supported across rural and island areas, and more than 1,100 of those have been delivered in island communities.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

The lack of workers is the key constraint for many island businesses and public services. The fund is a welcome measure for attracting and retaining people in our island communities. How flexible will the scheme be, given that organisations such as the Arran Development Trust have highlighted issues with accessing the affordable housing supply programme and the rural and islands housing fund?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

My officials recently met the Arran Development Trust to discuss the concerns that have been raised and to encourage collaborative working with North Ayrshire Council to support delivery of high-quality permanent and affordable homes for key workers where they are required. The £30 million rural and islands housing fund can also support delivery of high-quality homes, which can help to attract and retain economically active workers in rural areas, and community groups such as the Arran Development Trust are able to access the fund.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I know that the Deputy Presiding Officer will welcome the four homes that have been provided in Orkney, but there has been nothing else across the country for a whole year now. It is clear from what Kenneth Gibson has said that the criteria for the scheme are way too limited. Will the minister review the criteria and consider the development of a national empty homes fund for island and rural communities?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I will pick up on those two points. I mentioned the four homes that have been approved in Orkney, and discussions are on-going with councils in the Western Isles, Argyll and Bute, Fife, Perth and Kinross and North Ayrshire about the delivery of projects. It is important that the projects be delivered strategically across areas; it is not just about individual projects.

On the member’s point about empty homes, the Scottish Government has, I think, spent about £3.5 million on developing 9,000 empty homes. That funding is available across Scotland. I am happy to pick up on issues that the member has raised about rural communities in that regard.

There are many other developments. For example, we are working with Highland Council on the freeport provision in that area, and we are working with Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks on the key workers’ accommodation, both temporary and permanent, that is required for renewables hubs.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

When I last raised with the First Minister the issue of the provision of housing to allow Portree community hospital to be open 24/7, he gave me a long list of actions that were being taken around the Broadford hospital. Although those are laudable, they do nothing to keep the Portree hospital open when it is required. How will the Scottish Government provide housing for key workers specifically in Portree?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I was in the chamber when that issue was raised. One of the key things that we talked about in relation to key workers was the strategic overview that the local authority must take. It would be the first port of call in that regard.

I am happy to meet Rhoda Grant and people in the area to discuss that particular point. If she wants, she can contact me after this.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Question 8 is from Rachael Hamilton, who joins us remotely.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to update any guidance that it provides regarding the application of single-sex exemptions under the Equality Act 2010 in public buildings in Scotland. (S6O-03507)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Rachael Hamilton will be aware that the Equality Act 2010 is largely reserved. The United Kingdom Government has recently issued a call for input, which extends to Scotland, seeking examples of guidance on single-sex spaces. There are no immediate plans to update any guidance in that area.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

I am afraid that I have lost sound to the chamber, Presiding Officer, but I will ask my supplementary question.

Women’s groups have expressed concerns about the use of gender-neutral toilets in changing places. A UK Government consultation found that 81 per cent of respondents agreed with the intention that separate single-sex toilets be provided in public buildings. Does the Scottish Government plan to mirror the UK Government in bringing forward requirements for single-sex toilet facilities in non-domestic buildings?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

As the member has said, the matter relates to building regulations in England only. The Scottish building regulations require all new buildings to provide sanitary facilities for all occupants and visitors. Those who make a building warrant application are responsible for designing proposals that satisfy the building regulations. Such proposals should give appropriate consideration to the provision of male, female and unisex facilities to meet the needs of building users. The building regulations do not address the onward use of buildings by those who can and cannot use toilets based on a person’s gender or sex.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes portfolio question time.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am very supportive of members being able to work in a hybrid way in the Parliament, given that I am a working mother, but it is the responsibility of everyone taking part to have secure connections. I am concerned that the minister has given answers that the member asking the questions could not hear, by her own admission. What more can we do to ensure that members have secure connections, so that those who ask questions of the Government can hear the answers?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I do not think that that is a point of order, but it is not an unreasonable point, and I will reflect further on it. If there is anything to say to members on the matter, whether in the chamber or in writing, I will ensure that that happens.

NHS Physiotherapy Workforce

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-12559, in the name of Alex Rowley, on physiotherapy workforce shortage in Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament is concerned about the reported shortage of physiotherapists in the NHS workforce in Scotland and notes the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy’s campaign “Scotland needs more physios”; notes the belief that Scotland does not currently educate or train enough physiotherapists to supply the workforce needs, with, it understands, only 7% of the hundreds of university applicants accepted onto undergraduate physiotherapy training places, and that this leaves considerable scope to expand the supply of qualified physiotherapists; understands that undergraduate training places have doubled in England to meet demand, but that there has been no increase in Scotland in the last decade, meaning that, while Scottish course programmes are oversubscribed with applicants, not enough places are funded to meet the needs of Scotland’s NHS; acknowledges the reported views of physiotherapists, stating that they are finding it extremely difficult to recruit staff for their practices across Scotland, with record high vacancy rates, averaging over 10%, and that this is having an impact on existing staff morale, with increased levels of stress and work pressures; believes that the shortage of physiotherapists impacts on local communities, their services and staff, including in Mid Scotland and Fife, and further believes that physiotherapy is essential to reduce hospital admissions, speed up discharge from hospital and reduce reliance on social care, all of which are critical.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the members who signed my motion for debate, and I thank my business manager for giving me the time to have the debate.

In this debate, as well as focusing on shortages in the physiotherapy workforce, I will raise the wider issue of the failure of workforce planning in our national health service. My main plea to the Government today is for it to get to grips with workforce planning, because failure in workforce planning means that we simply store up problems across the NHS, and failure in one area simply adds to the pressure in other areas.

I will read out the content of an email that I received from a constituent, as I believe that it sums up the issues to which I will refer in the debate. It says:

“As a chartered physiotherapist working for NHS Scotland and living in your constituency I wish to raise my concerns regarding the shortage of physiotherapists in the NHS workforce.

Scotland does not currently educate or train enough physiotherapists to supply the workforce needs, and this is placing enormous pressure on services.

It is extremely difficult to recruit physiotherapists to join my Community Respiratory Team. We look after the most severely ill housebound population with COPD in an attempt to prevent admission to hospital.

Reducing the need for admission to hospital is obviously a key political priority with hospitals at maximum capacity and vulnerable people lying on trolleys in corridors sometimes for their whole admission.

The shortage of physiotherapy staff impacts across our teams. Staff morale is suffering as we work with increasing levels of stress and work pressures and we are prevented from delivering the care we would wish to provide.

We have recently had to stop the provision of service to those with less acute disease where we would provide education to improve long term self-management to reduce the long term severity of COPD and ultimately hospital admissions further down the line.

Increasing numbers are leaving the team due to the increased workload and stress which only exacerbates the issues.

Patients also suffer from the effects of short staffing as the service often has to close when we are at capacity for that day. Patients are then advised to contact the GP increasing their caseload.

Patients often can’t get through to the GP and end up with NHS24 and at A&E.

The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy is campaigning that ‘Scotland needs more physios’ and that while undergraduate training places have doubled in England to meet demand, there has been no increase in Scotland in the last decade.

This means that while Scottish course programmes are oversubscribed with applicants, not enough places are funded to meet the needs of Scotland’s NHS. The shortage of physiotherapists impacts on our local communities, their services and staff. Physiotherapy is essential to reduce hospital admissions, speed up discharge from hospital and reduce reliance on social care, which are all critical this winter.

I am therefore asking you to urge the Scottish government to urgently address the physiotherapy workforce shortage in Scotland.”

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Is not one of the roles of physiotherapy to allow people to return to work that much faster—to stop their being trapped in a period of sickness in which they cannot work? Is that not the perfect answer to the perfect storm that Alex Rowley has described?

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Martin Whitfield is absolutely correct. Those are some of the key points that I hope we will get across during the debate.

I believe that my constituent set out very clearly the issues and challenges and how the situation impacts on the current physiotherapy workforce. However, people in this chamber and across Scotland know the challenges and difficulties in accessing general practitioner services.

As the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy points out,

“Scotland’s ageing society creates a growing population of frail elderly and those with multiple long-term conditions that require physiotherapy in acute and community settings.”

I suggest that we must look to how we can take some of the pressure from GP practices—indeed, the chartered society’s website features case studies that demonstrate good practice.

For example, a practice manager in NHS Forth Valley’s area stated:

“With the new physiotherapists coming on board there has been an increase in patient satisfaction as patients are being seen quicker. There appears to be fewer and more appropriate referrals going to secondary care, specifically orthopaedics. The physio practitioners encourage patients to self-manage and patient safety is enhanced through early identification of serious pathology.”

Many other examples of good practice are happening across Scotland. A GP in Greenock said:

“Of all the work that’s ever been done in GP practices, this has been the one that feels like it has truly taken work away. Patients are safer—there is quicker access to the most appropriate intervention because triage assessment conducted by the physiotherapist gets people to the right place sooner.”

There is therefore much evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of such an approach.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank Alex Rowley for his powerful remarks. As this country spends more than any other developed country on acute hospitals, and the least on preventative community care, those examples are striking. Is it as frustrating to Mr Rowley as it is to me that the Government seems to be incapable of capturing examples of best practice and making them the national standard?

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Absolutely. The key point that I hope to get across in the debate is that, as the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy states,

“Effective workforce planning is essential and has been inadequate in Scotland. This has meant that while England has increased undergraduate physiotherapy training places by 96% since 2013, Scotland’s undergraduate programmes have seen virtually no increase in the last decade.”

That is why I now call on the Scottish Government to plan the physiotherapy workforce, increase the number of training places for Scotland-domiciled undergraduates, open new apprenticeships to qualifying students and meet the demand for physiotherapists who are desperately needed across Scotland. We can do so much better.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Physiotherapists play a valuable role in improving the health and wellbeing of people across Scotland. Physiotherapy is essential in preventing hospital admissions, speeding up discharge and supporting people to live independently. In turn, such outcomes not only improve the lives of individuals; they help the healthcare system to run efficiently and effectively.

I congratulate Alex Rowley on securing cross-party support for bringing the debate to the chamber. I take very seriously the real-life experience of physiotherapists and the impact on their patients that he has just set out. The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy’s “Scotland needs more physios” campaign speaks to the need to expand the supply of physiotherapists to the NHS in Scotland.

Although we should acknowledge the clear challenges that Mr Rowley laid out, and always be mindful that, for someone waiting for treatment—or, indeed, for practices or teams of staff who are under pressure or unable to recruit—contexts can vary, it is helpful for us to acknowledge the Scottish Government’s work on the issue and the investment that is being made.

The number of physiotherapists working in our NHS has increased by 29 per cent over the past 10 years, and the Scottish Government has significantly expanded the primary care multidisciplinary team workforce. Those teams are supported by an investment of £190 million in the primary care improvement fund. So far, 144 students have been funded towards meeting the Scottish Government’s target to create 225 more musculoskeletal practitioners, thereby increasing the physiotherapy workforce. It is important, too, to note that although the number of training places in England might be higher, front-line health spending in Scotland per head remains, and has consistently been, higher than in England, against an undoubtedly challenging economic and financial context.

On training and development for physiotherapists, I am very interested in apprenticeships and other earn-as-you-learn pathways. In the context of shortages in the workforce, those things open up career progression to those who are unable to attend university because of geography—we have heard about that in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s inquiry into rural healthcare—and older folk who are looking for a change of career. Family commitments may mean that those people cannot attend university full time.

At the beginning of my speech, I mentioned the context for those who are waiting for treatment, and I do not want to lose sight of that. In addition, many people will not know how treatment could assist them. When I was reflecting before this debate on the number of settings and treatments that physiotherapists provide, I thought about women’s health. Physiotherapy for women’s health can be life changing and prevent really debilitating problems and conditions that can have a huge impact on wellbeing and quality of life.

I ask members in the chamber to forgive me—I hope that this is not too much information, but I first experienced physio after the birth of my first child, which was only 27 years ago. [ Interruption .] Yes—27 years. It was just a 10-minute chat in which the physiotherapist explained physiology, told me about some exercises and gave me strict instructions to do them every time my hands were wet. You wash your hands a lot when you have a newborn baby.

Twenty-five years later, I took that knowledge and used it in my recovery after cancer treatment. I believe that it helped to stave off what may potentially have been some of the worst side effects of that treatment. That side of things was not discussed in the treatment discussions that I had with clinicians, but I think that it should have been. I do not know whether that was down to a shortage of physiotherapists or whether the reason was that teams that treat folk with cancer are, rightly, laser focused on doing just that. However, we need to bear in mind the challenges and shortages that have been highlighted and understand that, where services are strained, priorities shift. I would be interested in hearing from the minister what we can do to ensure that women’s health is considered as a priority, and particularly that we note the importance of physiotherapy in that regard.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

I am really pleased to have the chance to speak in this debate, as I once considered a career as a physiotherapist, although life clearly took a different turn. I might go back to it later—that is always an opportunity if we get things right.

Amid record vacancy rates and a failure to increase the number of undergraduate training places in Scotland, patients desperately need more physiotherapists. The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy says:

“patients’ recoveries are being put in jeopardy by a worsening workforce crisis, with Scotland now lagging behind other parts of the UK on physiotherapy training.”

The shortage in Scotland’s physiotherapy workforce creates further challenges across the healthcare system, which ultimately impacts patient care. Various factors are contributing to the demand for physios, including the ageing population, an increase in chronic conditions and backlogs for treatments, which have been made worse by the pandemic. However, it is not just that there is an increased demand for physios; it is also the case that the supply and training of physios have not kept pace with the demand.

Addressing the shortage requires a multifaceted approach. The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy has started a campaign called “Scotland needs more physios”, which is underscored by the belief that Scotland does not currently educate or train enough physiotherapists to supply the workforce to meet the population’s needs. In England, the number of undergraduate training places has doubled to meet demand, but there has been no such increase in Scotland in the past decade. Although Scottish course programmes are oversubscribed with applicants, not enough places are being funded to meet the needs of Scotland’s national health service.

Increasing the number of training places in physiotherapy programmes and enhancing support for students could and would help to boost the number of new graduates entering the field. Furthermore, physiotherapists have stated that they are finding it extremely difficult to recruit staff for their practices across Scotland, with vacancy rates at a record high. That has a knock-on effect on existing staff morale, with increased levels of stress and work pressures and challenging working conditions. There is competition for staff, which creates an artificial pressure on the environment, with people taking staff from one practice to another. We need better working conditions, the best competitive salaries and opportunities for professional development to retain staff and attract new recruits.

I recently met a physio who made it clear just how important they are to people with arthritic joints. I suppose that I would put myself in that bracket—as someone with arthritic joints, not as a physio. Right now, that condition is becoming much more prevalent among an ageing population and those who have had an active sporting life before coming here. Physiotherapy is a key profession in getting elderly patients who are stuck in hospital—Mr Rowley said this in his opening remarks—more mobile and able to function, and getting them home and much more independent. That helps, in turn, to free up beds, appointments and doctors for other cases.

A self-referral service would allow people to see a physio quickly. That would also make it important for patients to understand that it is as much down to them to be involved in their care—Ruth Maguire talked about how important it was to consistently do the exercises that her physio recommended—and that we have to buy into the treatments that physios give us.

However, it is not just the elderly who need the service. If a person suffers from pain or an injury for a long time, they are likely to get injuries elsewhere in their body as they compensate. That can also affect their mental health.

Physios, including work physiotherapists, are an essential part of our healthcare service, and they should never be underestimated or undervalued. I thank Mr Rowley very much for bringing this important debate to the chamber.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I join others in congratulating Alex Rowley on bringing this important debate to the Parliament and on the content of his speech. He is absolutely right that the issue sits in the wider context of workforce planning and the inadequacy of the current position.

I thank the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy for its very informative briefing.

There is no doubt in my mind about the value of physiotherapy, whether that is to do with its positive impact in reducing the number of hospital admissions, speeding up discharge from hospital or supporting people at home to live independent lives and move away from a reliance on social care. Physiotherapy is worth its weight in gold.

Like much of the NHS, the physiotherapy service would be nothing without its staff. However, there are simply not enough of them to meet demand. As Sue Webber said, vacancy rates are at a record high, at an average of 11 per cent across Scotland. The consequences are longer waiting times and additional pressure on existing staff and services.

We need much better workforce planning, and we need an increase in the number of training places to meet future demand. Although I am mindful of what Ruth Maguire said, I note that, in NHS England, the number of training places has increased by 42 per cent in the past 10 years—there was a further 18 per cent increase just in 2021-22 alone. By contrast, Scotland’s undergraduate physiotherapy programmes have shown virtually no increase since 2015. That simply is not good enough in the context of increasing demand.

There are steps that the minister could take. Physiotherapy could be made a controlled subject for workforce planning in higher education, which would increase the number of places. As Alex Rowley said, funding and learning routes could be established, and things such as apprenticeship models could be considered. The funded MSc physiotherapy bursary scheme could be maintained, and education and funding could be provided to support advanced practice. Taken together, those measures would go some way towards alleviating the pressure. I urge the minister to set out the concrete action that she intends to take to address the matter.

The issue is so important because we will not fulfil our ambition to deliver more primary care services without an expansion in workforce numbers. Physiotherapists are being brought into GP surgeries to help patients with musculoskeletal conditions. That is a good thing, because it enhances patient care, better integrates services and reduces GP workloads. There is also less testing, less prescribing and fewer secondary care referrals. That is better for the patient.

There are also further opportunities in primary care. There will be patients with complex comorbidities, and physiotherapists with advanced practice skills can reduce the reliance on GPs and inappropriate hospital admissions.

As Ruth Maguire eloquently said, there are opportunities in women’s health—in pelvic, obstetrics and gynaecology services—that might lead to surgery being avoided.

There is huge potential for community rehabilitation to reduce the number of people who become needlessly disabled and to contribute to their leading full and active lives.

Physiotherapy is good for patients and reduces the pressure on secondary care. We know that there is a beneficial impact for patients, GPs and secondary care if more physiotherapy can be delivered in primary care, but there are simply not enough physiotherapists.

If the Government agrees that that is the right direction of travel, we must see the warm words matched by action. Let us see an increase in the number of training places, and let us see that now.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I am grateful to Alex Rowley for securing this important debate, and I thank members for their excellent, thoughtful and thought-provoking contributions, which are very much appreciated.

It is clear that colleagues in the chamber value the critical role that physiotherapists play. They support our NHS and help improve the health and wellbeing of people across Scotland. It is likely that everyone here has benefited from a physiotherapist’s expertise at some point in their life—I know that I have.

Every day, physiotherapists right across Scotland work with people of all ages and with a wide variety of health conditions, from those who have acute neurological disorders or are in intensive care to those managing long-term conditions. Physiotherapists can help people to achieve and maintain movement and function, as Alex Rowley and a number of other speakers have said.

I know from my own portfolio that physiotherapists play an important role, as Ruth Maguire and Jackie Baillie have said, in improving women’s health. Ms Maguire’s eloquent description of her own experience was incredibly helpful. I specifically discussed that area when I was preparing for this debate, and I will follow it up with my women’s health team after the debate.

As I have said, physiotherapists work in a range of places, including hospitals, GP practices, people’s homes and their workplaces. I was able to see the innovative nature of their work alongside other allied health professions, nurses and bioengineers from the University of Strathclyde at University hospital Wishaw, where their skills were put to good use—alongside new technology—in the rehabilitation of people living with strokes.

As Alex Rowley has noted, rehabilitation is a key area of work for physiotherapists, along with other members of the multidisciplinary team. That might involve helping people who have a wide variety of problems by reducing their pain, improving their mobility and independence and helping them back to a full life.

However, prehabilitation, which ensures that people keep fit and are ready for treatment, is also vital, with physiotherapists working alongside the leisure sector and third sector partners. Indeed, I have seen the value of that in Oban in my constituency. As Paul Sweeney has said, it is important that we capture good examples, and, in that respect, I was pleased to see Moray leisure centre in Elgin doing something that Sue Webber touched on, by encouraging people to take up—and keep up—exercises prescribed by physiotherapists. The fact that that is happening in a leisure centre, as opposed to a hospital, might have other benefits.

Furthermore, as Martin Whitfield noted, physiotherapists are now able to legally certify and issue fit notes. They also act as the first point of contact for many people with musculoskeletal problems, which helps reduce the pressure on NHS doctors, particularly GPs.

When I attended last year’s Scottish health awards, which Jackie Baillie also attended, I was delighted to see physiotherapist Paulina Raniszewska winning the allied health professional category. That trophy was awarded in recognition of Paulina’s incredible compassion and expertise, which have brought hope and relief to many people living with long Covid. I thank each and every one of our physiotherapists for the invaluable role that they play in our daily lives, and for their positive impact on wider society.

Both the motion and members’ contributions today have raised concerns about a shortage of physiotherapists in Scotland, but it is important to note that there are currently more than 3,500 people working in physiotherapy across NHS Scotland, which represents an increase of 29 per cent in the past 10 years. That includes physiotherapy support workers, who are an integral part of the workforce and play a vital role in achieving the best outcomes for individuals.

At the end of December 2023, physiotherapy had a vacancy rate of 6.7 per cent, which compares with 9.3 per cent the previous year. Although it is positive that the vacancy rate is coming down, we have to recognise that NHS Scotland is a large organisation and will, given the natural turnover of staff in an organisation of such size, always carry some vacancies.

The Scottish Government is not complacent. I recognise the need to recruit and train greater numbers of physiotherapists, and for two reasons, the first of which is to support the workforce needs of the future and to ensure the sustainability of such a vital profession. Secondly, if we are serious about reforming our NHS and delivering more preventative care, physiotherapists will be a key component of that, as we heard from the constituent whom Alex Rowley quoted.

Our determination to address workforce challenges and increase the number of physiotherapists is not just warm words—it can be demonstrated by our actions. In December 2019, the integrated health and social care workforce plan for Scotland committed to creating an additional 225 advanced musculoskeletal practitioners in primary care by increasing training places for the physiotherapy workforce, and the physiotherapy funded places scheme has provided funding for the tuition fees for selected postgraduate pre-registration students to increase the number of home students to support the workforce. Delays were experienced due to the pandemic but, to date, 144 physiotherapy students have been recruited, with the first cohort of students having graduated in September 2023. That is all down to Government policy ambitions to increase workforce numbers, with the approach designed collaboratively with higher education institutions and health boards to ensure that its implementation benefits every part of Scotland, particularly rural and island areas.

The Scottish Government also concluded an allied health professional education and workforce review at the start of 2023. Leaders across allied health professions, including physiotherapy, worked collaboratively to examine workforce and education issues to improve our understanding of and alignment between the two. The review made a number of recommendations, including widening access through the earn-as-you-learn model, as noted by members today, and the promotion of AHP careers.

The AHP review also recognised the importance of improving our data so that we design a workforce that is fit for the future and which reflects the needs of our population. Our physiotherapy student intake numbers have generally remained consistent throughout the past four years, but by building greater capacity within our workforce to support practice placements, we will give our higher education establishments the opportunity to increase current student intake numbers. An advisory board is overseeing the effective implementation of the recommendations to ensure that we develop an AHP workforce that will meet the current and future needs of Scotland’s health and care system.

I am pleased that we are engaging with the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy in Scotland, and I hope that that engagement will continue. I am sure that it will.

I close the debate by thanking all those who have participated and have shared their views on this inspiring profession, and I thank Alex Rowley again for lodging the motion. I am happy to discuss with members any of the points that have been raised today, particularly those that relate to public health and women’s health, if that would be helpful. I am sure that the cabinet secretary would be open to that, too. I hope that, today, we have demonstrated that physiotherapists are integral to delivering the health and care services that we need, as well as shown the regard in which the Government holds them.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate.

Further Education Sector (Industrial Relations)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Graeme Dey on industrial relations in the further education sector.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I am grateful for the opportunity to make this statement on the important matter of industrial action in the college sector. The issue is felt across each of our constituencies and regions and, regrettably, has been topical for a decade now.

Colleges across Scotland make an immeasurable contribution to our communities, our economy and our nation as a whole. They do good work. Unfortunately, though, that is all too often overshadowed by the industrial strife that has dogged the sector for the past 10 years. Regionalisation and the introduction of national bargaining have brought some positive changes for many, yet the relationship between employers and unions, particularly in some localities, has become fractious to the point that, sadly, when many of us think of colleges, we instinctively think of industrial action.

Strikes have become the norm in the sector. I think that I am right in saying that we have had industrial strife in nine of the past 10 years, which has had an impact on students, staff and the wider community. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of those concerned want an end to that strife, not just for now but for the future.

Of course, hard-line positions have been adopted by some on both sides, but I believe that, among the majority of management and staff, there is a genuine desire to end the present dispute and find a better way forward. The path to that has not proved to be easy, but there are some hopeful signs that we can travel it. With good will from all sides, we can, I believe, reach a destination that serves the best interests of colleges, of staff and, most important of all, of students. It really does matter that we establish more harmonious relationships in the sector.

The First Minister set out the Government’s priorities last week, and we know that colleges have a proven track record of delivering. Colleges, as anchor institutions, will continue to play an integral role in enabling our vision of delivering the reform agenda, and of delivering for all of Scotland.

The disputes that have dogged colleges over the past 10 years have taken place against vastly different financial backdrops, from a time when public finances were in a healthy state through to now, when we find ourselves in the most challenging budgetary situation since devolution 25 years ago.

I acknowledge that the budget settlement that we have been able to afford colleges is not as we would wish it to be; the most difficult budgetary position since devolution has meant challenges for budget settlements for colleges and in many other parts of the public sector. We would like to be in a position to invest more, but the fact is that, were we to invest more in colleges, that investment would have to come from somewhere else in the budget—from schools or universities or from other portfolios. However, I think that it is possible to find a fair and affordable solution to the current dispute, and we could absolutely make progress in addressing the longer-term systemic issue.

Up until the past few weeks, we were at an impasse in the dispute. The employers’ full and final offer of a £5,000 consolidated pay increase over three years had been rejected, and no one was budging. It is to the credit of the trade unions that they have sought to move the dispute into a better space. On the support staff side, strikes by Unison members have been suspended to allow staff to vote on the pay deal on offer. It is, of course, up to staff to determine whether they deem the award to be acceptable, but I hope that a positive resolution can be found and that members of Unison, Unite and the GMB will have pay rises, backdated to September 2022, landing in their bank accounts quickly. The Educational Institute of Scotland Further Education Lecturers Association has made a revised claim that would see that three-year deal being accepted, with the addition of a fourth-year pay rise for academic year 2025-26.

We are still a way off from an agreement being reached with lecturers. There are various components to the claim that, as lodged, are viewed somewhat differently, but I welcome the meaningful dialogue that has taken place between the two sides since the new claim was tabled. Credit is due to EIS-FELA for initiating that, and it is now vital that the two sides continue to work through it to find common ground.

Earlier this week, the College Employers Scotland executive agreed to resume negotiations and explore the option of a fourth year. The National Joint Negotiating Committee for lecturing met yesterday to begin fresh negotiations, with further discussions scheduled for tomorrow.

I have encouraged and continue to encourage the management side to see the move by the unions as an opportunity to bring peace to the sector until at least the end of the 2025-26 academic year and to provide a chance to fix the broken negotiating mechanism. However, as I do that, I recognise the obvious difficulty, which is that they, like the Scottish Government, have no indication of what funding they will have at their disposal for the 2025-26 academic year. As things stand, there are no extra moneys.

There are those who have demanded direct intervention by the Government in the dispute, despite the financial position being crystal clear, the Strathesk Resolutions report being candid in branding previous interventions “unhelpful” and the national bargaining processes excluding such a role. Of course, many of those who are calling for that are silent on where the additional moneys might be found. What the past few weeks have demonstrated is that, when the collective will is there, the existing structures can be made to work and, I hope, deliver an outcome that is both fair and affordable—and fairness and affordability are essential in all this.

I accept that there is a gap between what moneys colleges would have had at their disposal if funding had risen in line with inflation over the past few years, and I acknowledge that that puts them in a challenging position. I know how that feels as a minister, when the block grant support from Westminster falls in real terms and the Scottish Government budget is further stressed by rising costs and competing demands. However, collectively, and despite those impediments, we have to find a way forward that ensures that colleges are on a sustainable long-term footing when an injection of public cash is not an option—at least, not without reducing funding to other parts of the education system or reducing funding elsewhere across Government spend.

When national bargaining was introduced, we agreed a system that, rightly, places responsibility for reaching agreement on the employer representatives and trade unions, through the NJNC; indeed, that was integral to the creation of a modern, flexible college sector. For our part, we remain committed to national bargaining. That is why I have been clear that the Scottish Government will not directly intervene in the negotiations and seek to force a resolution, as to do so would fundamentally undermine and alter the voluntary national bargaining process and would have long-term consequences.

Although I absolutely accept that the current dispute has been going on for too long, it is clear from the recent positive developments that the employers and trade unions are able to make progress within the agreed framework, albeit that, looking to the future, everyone agrees that the framework and the environment in which it functions need to be changed. Surely we should all be encouraging both sides to develop recent progress into meaningful and constructive dialogue that leads to an end to the dispute. However, as I said earlier, we are still some way off that, and goodwill gestures from both sides right now might go a long way to putting momentum into this.

The subject of the planned marking boycott and employers flagging that they will withhold pay for what is described as “action short of strike” has been aired in the chamber before. Both sides have legal advice that the employers’ response is lawful, but do any of us want students to be further impacted in that way or staff to lose pay? If sufficient progress continues to be made in the fresh negotiations, which continue tomorrow, can we not find a way of suspending that element of the action and taking away the threat of deeming to allow progress to be made on settling the dispute?

Reaching agreement is not just desirable for the immediate and obvious reasons. It will also give us space to take forward the recommendations of the lessons learned report, or whatever derivation of those recommendations can be agreed on, to ensure that the national bargaining mechanism works far better in the future.

I have convened a group of college and trade union representatives to begin the process of supporting the sector in implementing the recommendations from the most recent lessons-learned exercise. The group met again yesterday morning, and the fact that the meeting went ahead a few hours before some of the participants were due to take part in negotiations around the current dispute says a great deal about the commitment that is in play.

It is not in my gift to share with members the specific actions that are under consideration. At this stage, to do so would be unhelpful. However, I am confident that the efforts of the group will pay dividends, and I thank them again for their involvement.

As minister, my role in this is simply a convening one. I am hopeful that it will be only short term, as I seek to facilitate a broad agreement on how matters are progressed and then leave those concerned to take them forward.

Members who have closely followed industrial relations in the college sector will be painfully aware of the acrimony and finger pointing that have characterised negotiations over the years. They will recognise the talk of personality clashes and grudge holding being at play. I believe that there is now a collective will to move on from that. I hear from all sides that they are scunnered by what has gone on and that they want to move the whole process to a better place.

My role is to help them do that, and I will continue to facilitate discussions to ensure that employers and trade unions can create an environment and a process that will result in successful negotiations in the future and break the cycle of annual industrial action. I will also continue to do all that I can to actively encourage college management and the trade unions to engage constructively in seeking a resolution to the present dispute.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for that, after which we will need to move on to the next item of business. Members who wish to ask a question should press their request-to-speak buttons.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for providing advance sight of his statement.

I note the tone that the minister has sought to strike—although it bears noting that the Scottish Government is, in fact, sitting on the largest cash-terms block grant in history—and his remarks towards the end of his statement about his optimism that progress is being made. Accordingly, I will offer three questions, which I hope will allow further light to be shed without risking that progress.

First, the minister talked about the National Joint Negotiating Committee playing an “integral” role, but he then talked about a “broken negotiating mechanism”. Despite a number of voices suggesting it, the committee remains without an independent chair. Will the minister tell us his views on such a chair and whether any progress will be made on that?

Secondly, he gave credit to the unions for moving the process to a better space and initiating meaningful dialogue. He said that strikes have been suspended by Unison to allow staff to vote on the pay deal that is on offer, but can he advise the chamber whether that is the position of all the unions that are involved in this situation?

Finally, the minister referred to national bargaining and mentioned the fact that industrial action has been taken in nine out of the past 10 years. However, that is in a context in which national bargaining has been in place for eight of those years. He hinted at making the mechanism work better. That begs the question whether it is now time to hold a review of how national bargaining is operating and whether it requires to be improved and altered.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Liam Kerr has asked several questions, and I hope to take a little bit of time to answer them.

I understand the premise that Liam Kerr advances about the deal that was on the table being put to members. In the context of the lecturing side, CES asked EIS-FELA to do that, but the union felt unable to do it. However, we have moved on from there, and discussions are now taking place on a four-year deal. One would hope that, if agreement can be reached, that deal would be put to the membership.

The situation with regard to the support staff unions is slightly more complicated. Unison put the deal to its members, Unite did the same but its members had not been striking at that point, and the GMB had previously accepted the deal. Therefore, it is a bit of a mixed picture.

On the wider point, I say to Liam Kerr that it is possible to be in favour of the concept of national bargaining while recognising that elements of the current process and the environment in which it is undertaken would benefit from change. The extent to which that is acknowledged can be seen in the commitment that all sides are showing to taking forward the lessons learned report work that I mentioned. There is a recognition of the problems and a willingness to address them.

On the issue of the lack of a chair, I think that Liam Kerr is referring to the Strathesk report’s recommendation about the NJNC having a neutral, independent chair. The negotiations are currently chaired on a rotational basis by each of the participants. Among those parties, there is a respectful divergence of views on the merits of, and the need for, an independent chair, but there is a willingness to explore the introduction of a facilitating role to assist with the improvement of the process, and work on that is under way.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I, too, thank the minister for providing advance sight of his statement, although I have to say that I am somewhat disappointed.

As the minister pointed out in his statement, the issue has gone on for far too long—he said that it has been “topical for a decade”. I would say that, for students and staff, it has been torment for a decade.

The minister was right to mention the vastly different financial backdrops, but what has not changed in that time is the Government or its unwillingness to act. The minister said that he would like to invest more, but that he would have to cut elsewhere in order to do that. I remind the minister that it was his Government that made the choice to redeploy college money elsewhere, his Government that failed to prioritise colleges and his Government’s choices that got colleges into this mess in the first place, so his Government must get them out of it. If he is not willing to act, I would gladly take his place.

If it is not the minister’s job to step in and save colleges, whose job is it? What exactly is his job?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

There is a certain predictability about the contributions from the Labour side of the chamber, which is disappointing.

Pam Duncan-Glancy talks about money being taken away from colleges. One of the principal challenges that the cabinet secretary and I faced when we came into post was the funding of the teachers’ pay settlement. I gently remind Pam Duncan-Glancy that many on her side of the chamber demanded intervention for the settlement of the teachers’ dispute. The Government assisted the councils to do that. That money had to be found somewhere. Of course, the cries are then, “Where did you get it from? It shouldn’t have come from there.” Here we are again. The interventionists demand more action. There is no additional money.

On the point about ministerial involvement, I have been active on both fronts that I identified, working with both sides. They have been constructive—perhaps more so than Pam Duncan-Glancy.

I reiterate that there is an opportunity to move the issue on. That is the role of the minister.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

This period of industrial action has clearly been difficult for Scotland’s colleges, yet we must all retain our focus on outcomes for students. With that in mind, how can the post-school education reform agenda support Scotland’s colleges?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

There is an enormous opportunity for the reform agenda to support Scotland’s colleges. One example of that is on-going work to better align the relationship between the colleges—and universities—and employers, to ensure for the benefit of those employers, the economy and, of course, the students that the education that is provided aligns with the needs of those employers and leads to sustainable employment. To be clear to Michelle Thomson, I absolutely see a pivotal role for colleges in the reform agenda.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The Scottish Funding Council, Audit Scotland and Edinburgh College have all said that the key issue is the continuation of reductions in funding in the sector, with colleges facing the real threat of running out of cash. The minister himself said that that issue is of long standing and has dogged colleges over the past 10 years. What actions will be required to future proof and provide fair funding for our college sector in order to guarantee stable employment relations as well as the learning experiences for our students?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Sue Webber is a very reasonable person, and she will recognise that part of the difficulty is the actions of her party’s Government in Westminster and the impact that those have had on our budgets. However, let us set that to one side.

A demonstration of our commitment—my commitment—to the college sector is to be found in the financial settlement that it has received. I have acknowledged that that settlement is not what I would have wanted it to be. However, it is in line with the funding that the sector received last year, as we said it would be, in very difficult and challenging financial circumstances.

I believe that there are better ways of working between the Government, the colleges and the universities on budget settlements and many other things. We are committed to working with the colleges to try to ensure that, whatever the budget settlements are, they are delivered to the best effect for the colleges, and certainly with the least harm.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I have had a lot of contact from college lecturers and union officials who, I know full well, do not want to be on strike and want only to be in the classroom doing what they do best. They are eager that a fair resolution is found urgently.

I welcome the statement from the minister, but what further steps can the Government take within our devolved competence to ensure fair work in our college sector and resolve what is a long-running pay dispute?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

On the context of the pay dispute and the wider situation, I outlined in the statement what action we are taking. On fair work in the wider sense, Fulton MacGregor makes a fair point. We make progress on certain issues, such as trade union representation on boards, which has real potential to improve the situation in the longer term, yet trade union reps are not going on to the boards for a variety of reasons. We need to work on that. Better trade union representation—active trade union representation—at the heart of the governance of individual colleges will certainly improve the governance and the individual relationships in those localities.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

In his statement, the minister mentioned the criticism that the Strathesk Resolutions report levelled at previous interventions. It is right to say that it described those as “last-minute”. Given that there is now a chance to fix the broken negotiating mechanism, is the minister willing to take that on? How does he see that helping to improve the environment in which discussions take place?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I do not say this to dodge Martin Whitfield’s perfectly reasonable question, but he will recognise that it is not for me to drive such change. Rather, it is for the participants to outline what they would find acceptable and what common ground they would find in the context of change. A bit of that is taking place at the moment.

There is a recognition that the mechanism as it currently functions needs to be examined. More than that, it is about the culture that surrounds the approach to the negotiations. We all know that, over many years, there has been great angst and strife in the discussions, and much harking back to what happened years ago. What we need is a reset of approach and culture in addition to looking at the mechanism.

I will continue to work with the trade unions and the colleges. In fact, we will continue to meet over the summer to try to get the discussions into a better space.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

I have just had to do a wee bit of thinking ahead, because the question that I had in mind was similar to the one that has just been asked. As the minister has alluded to, trust is at the heart of any good relationship. The Strathesk report identified the lack of such trust as being central to the current state of industrial relations in the further education sector. Can the minister say how we might, first, rebuild that trust, or help to do so, and, secondly, take forward the report’s wider recommendations?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

We might not adopt all the report’s recommendations, but we need to find common ground. Some areas of the report contain respectful disagreement. As I said in my statement, I think that we will see some derivation of the report being implemented.

Bill Kidd hits the nail on the head: this is a trust issue. At the heart of the systemic problems around pay negotiations over these past many years has been a lack of trust and good faith. We cannot wave a magic wand to fix that. The negotiating mechanism itself could be improved, but the culture around it and the approach to be taken are the bigger problems.

Another aspect that comes to mind and also feeds into trust is the accuracy of the data that is deployed in the negotiations. Often, the claim, or the stance that is promoted, is that a piece of data is accurate, but it is later disputed. We need to find a mechanism for checking such assertions so that everyone is clear on the facts as they are.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

I hope that the minister will share my belief that one of the foundations of good industrial relations at national level is having well-trained and well-supported trade union representatives at local level within each institution. Earlier this week, I was concerned to learn that City of Glasgow College is proposing the closure of the trade union education centre that it runs jointly with the Scottish Trades Union Congress. I am concerned not just about the outcome and its impact but about the process that is being followed. The proposed closure is just five weeks from now, which does not allow for adequate consultation with college union representatives. What discussions, if any, has the minister had with the college and the STUC thus far? Does he share my objection to the closure of an asset that is incredibly valuable to Scotland’s trade union movement?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I have not had direct discussions with the Scottish Trades Union Congress, but the issue has been raised with me, so I am aware of it. My understanding is that the current contract for the provision concludes at the end of June, although it may have been extended slightly. The host college’s view is that the course is underutilised and underfunded by the Scottish Trades Union Congress, in partnership with which it operates the provision. That is the college’s view; I am not saying that it is mine, too.

I understand that no final decision has yet been taken on the matter. If that is so, any decision to end the course or to move it to another college—which is perhaps the more likely outcome if it will end in Glasgow—would be the subject of consultation. I understand that the Glasgow Colleges Regional Board has not yet had any direct engagement with the trade unions, but they are due to meet next week. I encourage the unions to raise the issue directly with the GCRB. [ Interruption .]

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I encourage members who are chatting at the back to keep their conversations out of the chamber.

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

As members will know, a number of colleges have undertaken restructuring exercises, including the one at UHI North, West and Hebrides. What engagement has the Scottish Government had with the college and its staff throughout the on-going dispute, particularly given the impact that the loss of even a small number of jobs can have in a rural community?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I visited the college in question in September last year. I had discussions with the new board and the principal, and I met the student body as well. We were very much alive to some of the challenges that are faced there, and I know that that is an on-going situation. I have also met—not specifically on that college, but on the University of the Highlands and Islands in a general sense—the Scottish Funding Council and the UHI itself to discuss the future direction of the colleges and UHI central.

We are all committed to the concept of the UHI, but there is recognition, certainly among the constituent parts of the UHI, that things need to change. There is a view that the funding that is available to the institution could be better utilised across the piece. I am committed to working with the UHI on behalf of all the colleges to improve things, but I stress that any change would be made from the bottom up.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

The minister has done his best to strike an optimistic tone. We certainly hope that that optimism is well placed, because the matter has been allowed to drag on for far too long, with increasingly polarised positions. I hope that this is the beginning of the end of the dispute. Does the minister accept that the Government’s intervention on teachers’ pay, although it may have resolved that dispute, has aggravated the colleges dispute still further, particularly where money was taken from the college sector?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I accept the point to the extent that, if we spend money once, we cannot spend it again. However, I suspect that very few voices were raised in the chamber at the time protesting against the settlement of the teachers dispute. That is simply the reality of this place. I want to be clear with Alex Cole-Hamilton. I think that I am being realistic about the chances of the current dispute being settled. I hope that I have not been overoptimistic. I have said that there is quite a long way to go before we get to that position, but I am optimistic about the longer-term situation being resolved, because the will and the commitment are there to do that.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Whenever there are such disputes, it is always hard-working Scottish students who are impacted. Students in Scotland’s colleges have had their learning disrupted for years due to on-going industrial disputes. Although we recognise that negotiation is key to ensuring a mutually beneficial outcome, what actions is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that the learning experience of Scotland’s students is maintained, given that the college sector is an essential component of future-proofing Scotland’s economy?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

First, I do not know any lecturers or college principals who want students to be adversely impacted by this. However, the member is right: the students are caught in the middle of it, and they have been for a number of years.

On how we address that in a practical sense, the member will remember that a number of mitigations were put in place last year, quite successfully, around the marking boycott that impacted our college students. Colleges are already looking at those mitigations, but I stress that it is far better that we find a way to avoid being in that situation again. I do not think that lecturers want to be doing that to students; principals do not want that; and students want to find themselves in that position least of all. I reiterate the plea that I made earlier that we get the negotiations sufficiently advanced that we can suspend that action, pending getting the dispute—finally—settled.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

We are facing the most difficult budget since devolution began. Will the minister outline how the UK Government’s financial decisions have impacted on Scotland’s public finances? Does he agree that the Opposition parties have to recognise the financial context when they demand action from the Scottish Government?