Scottish Parliament, 5 June 2024

383 contributions from 67 members. The official report.

Portfolio Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio question time, and the first portfolio is constitution, external affairs and culture, and parliamentary business. As ever, I make a plea for succinct questions and answers in order to get in as many questions as possible.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that children and young people have opportunities to engage with fine arts and performing arts, such as music, drama and art. (S6O-03516)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government’s long-standing investment in the youth music initiative has helped young people across Scotland to access music-making opportunities and to develop their wider skills and learning. To improve the accessibility of theatre for school pupils, the National Theatre of Scotland, one of the five national performing companies that receives funding from the Scottish Government, manages a dedicated theatre in schools programme. Having expressive arts within Scotland’s curriculum provides a platform for teachers to use interdisciplinary approaches and to work collaboratively with cultural organisations to increase opportunities for children and young people to engage with the arts.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Many of us first engage with the arts, such as music, drama and art, in the school curriculum. We know that access to arts in school has been consistently eroded by the Scottish Government. Does the cabinet secretary still believe that a broad education should include the arts? What damage is the lack of access to the arts in the education system doing to the future of performing arts such as music and drama?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Like Brian Whittle, I had the good fortune to go to a school in which music and the arts were central to teaching. I learned a musical instrument and even reached the giddy heights of the Edinburgh secondary schools orchestra.

I agree with him that it is important that pupils right across Scotland get opportunities to take part in culture and the arts. In my initial answer to Mr Whittle’s question, I outlined the ways in which that works extremely successfully. If Brian Whittle has any specific examples of where there are deficiencies, I would be happy to hear from him.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Can the cabinet secretary outline how reductions to arts and culture spending by the Westminster Government have impacted Scotland’s budget?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Through the Barnett formula, the Scottish Government receives block funding based on the total changes in United Kingdom departmental allocations for areas of devolved competence. The changes in spending by a UK Government department do not necessarily reflect an increase or decrease in that UK department’s budget allocation, so they may not directly impact the Barnett consequentials. However, I note that, although the UK Tory Government and the Welsh Labour Government have both cut culture spending, we, in Scotland, are increasing it.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

What assessment has the Scottish Government made or what assessment will it make of the viability of film in the curriculum, given that the funding for the screen educator in residence pilot programme, which the Scottish Government has supported, ends this month? How will the Government make sure that the progress that has been built by the programme is not lost?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Screen education has huge potential in Scotland’s schools. In fact, a number of pilot schools have been implementing screen studies, which I am very excited about. Screen Scotland is taking that work forward and there is significant international interest in it. I would be happy to update Neil Bibby, to let him know about the plans for screen education to be introduced into Scotland’s schools. I think that the work will have cross-party support.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the culture secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding how the census outputs on armed forces veterans, due to be released on 13 June, will be able to be used to inform a better understanding of the veterans community. (S6O-03517)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Inclusion of a question on veteran status in the census for the first time marked a significant step forward in developing the evidence base on veterans in Scotland and their characteristics. Officials will analyse the outputs, which we will use to consider how we continue to support veterans and their families. The analysis will inform the discussions that the Minister for Veterans will have with other portfolio ministers. A further update on our work to use emerging evidence to understand more about the circumstances and needs of veterans will be provided in the minister’s annual update to the Parliament.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that response and for the inclusion of the question in the census.

The most recent data show that the number of veterans of the UK armed forces resident in Scotland is 220,000. That data is from the annual population survey conducted by the Office for National Statistics in 2017, although we know that there is a reticence on the part of veterans to identify as such, which means that, in some cases, they cannot access the support services that they need. How will the cabinet secretary utilise the census data and share it with charities to aid them in targeting support for veterans?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Maurice Golden asks an important question and gives me the opportunity to commend him for his work as the convener of the cross-party group on the armed forces and veterans community. In this week, when we mark the 80th anniversary of the D-day allied landings in France, the importance of our veterans and armed forces community is recognised across the Scottish Parliament and by the Scottish Government.

I give Maurice Golden the commitment that all relevant census information, once published, will be shared with Veterans Scotland and, through it, with all of its much-valued member charities, associations, trusts, organisations and veterans champions, which will help them in targeting support.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Carol Mochan joins us remotely.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on what role local authorities have in preserving the heritage and culture of the areas that they serve. (S6O-03518)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government’s position is to ensure that local authorities have the freedom to make independent decisions for their own communities.

Local authorities have powers to designate conservation areas, or areas of special architectural or historic interest, under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997. They have planning authority to safeguard local development decisions in their areas in line with the national planning guidance and legislation in respect of historic assets. Local authorities may also develop their own heritage strategies to protect and celebrate heritage in their area.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

Local authorities across Scotland, including Scottish National Party-run councils, are being forced to make savings in areas such as libraries, cultural centres and key heritage sites as a result of year-on-year real-terms cuts to their budgets by this Government. If it values the role that local authorities play in preserving the heritage and culture of the areas that they serve, why does the Scottish Government keep passing budgets that deliver brutal cuts to councils, putting heritage and culture sites across the south of Scotland and the rest of the country at risk?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government very much values the role that local authorities play in the provision of culture and heritage. I had the great pleasure of joining the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities in recent weeks in hosting a meeting about this. Is there more that local authorities and the Scottish Government can do within our current budgets? I think that we are all trying our best, but there is no getting away from the fact that we are having to work within the structures of a United Kingdom austerity policy that is being pursued by the Conservative Party and that, sadly, is being emulated by the UK Labour Party.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Can the cabinet secretary provide an update regarding the work of the local and national delivery group and how that work can help to increase links between local and national initiatives?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

So far this year, the local and national delivery group has helped to shape the development of a collaborative event that was jointly hosted by the Scottish Government and COSLA. The event was held on 20 May and explored the value of culture in delivering a wealth of local outcomes, with a view to developing partnership working across boundaries at local and national levels. The Scottish Government will work with the local and national delivery group to consider tangible next steps based on the themes raised at the event.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government, as part of its work to further the case for Scottish independence, what engagement it has carried out with businesses regarding Scotland’s constitutional future. (S6O-03519)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

This is a Government that is engaged with and supportive of business, and ministers and officials met a number of businesses and their representatives throughout the drafting of the “Building a New Scotland” series. We will continue to engage with and listen to Scotland’s people, civic organisations and businesses, to drive a growing economy that is fair and green.

In a recent speech to business leaders, the First Minister advised that

“re-joining the European Union as an independent country and making our own economic decisions”

is the best way to meet the challenges that businesses face and to grow our economy.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

The Scottish National Party Government has always supported small enterprises in my region, but many businesses are struggling due to the decisions that have been taken outwith Scotland on migration, trade and EU membership. Can the minister tell me how, compared with Brexit Britain’s current insular approach, an independent Scotland will better serve Scottish business?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Scotland is already a good place to do business, as the on-going global success of many of our sectors and businesses testifies. As we set out in the “Building a New Scotland” prospectus papers, with greater powers over immigration, employment and taxation, an independent Scotland in the European Union could learn from the United Kingdom’s failures and from industrial policy successes elsewhere to build a business environment that is designed to maximise the economic benefits of the many opportunities that Scotland has, not least the transition to net zero.

If colleagues have not yet read any of the papers, I draw their particular attention to the paper that compares the economic success of every one of our neighbouring countries, which all outperform the United Kingdom.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

When the cabinet secretary engages with business, is he able to give any meaningful insight into the SNP’s currency plans? His latest fictional white paper says:

“As soon as practicable, Scotland would move to its own independent currency, the Scottish pound.

Until then, the pound sterling would remain Scotland’s currency.”

Would the minister like to say how soon “As soon as practicable” is? Is that not just the latest attempt to kick difficult cans down the road as the Government glosses over the legitimate fears of Scottish business about his independence plans?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

“No” is the short answer to Mr Hoy’s question, but I encourage him to actually read the paper. I am not sure whether he has read it. [Interruption.] He is shaking his head, so he clearly has not read it. If he had, I am sure that he would have found the detail very convincing and hugely encouraging for Scotland.

We look forward to having the opportunity to live in a democracy and having a democratic say in a referendum about the country’s future. Looking at all our neighbouring countries, which all outperform the United Kingdom, I think that it is a prize worth joining together for, across the chamber, although I suspect that that is not likely in the case of Mr Hoy.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Question 5 is from Willie Rennie, who joins us remotely.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to propose a parliamentary debate on the provision of early learning and childcare. (S6O-03520)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I recognise Willie Rennie’s long-standing interest in childcare. As he will be aware, the Parliamentary Bureau is responsible for proposing the parliamentary business programme, which comes to Parliament for agreement. I am happy to discuss with him and the relevant minister whether I can bring the issue that he raises to the Parliamentary Bureau for consideration.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

That is a helpful response from the minister, and I expect nothing less from him. It is really important that we take forward the previous First Minister’s commitment to close the gap between the funding for the private, voluntary and independent sector and the funding for council nurseries. The gap is big and is having an impact on the provision of staff—particularly experienced staff—in private sector nurseries.

I am happy to meet the minister. Could we have that meeting next week, along with the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise, so that we can get the debate going?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I certainly commit to meeting Mr Rennie as soon as possible. He raises important issues. Notwithstanding the challenges, the private sector continues to grow, and more professionals are entering that part of the sector. Of course we can meet and discuss those matters. In principle, I am open to us having a debate, because it would enable us to debate the fact that we in Scotland already have the most generous provision of early years learning and childcare of any part of the United Kingdom.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

To ask the Scottish Government how it supports people in the Motherwell and Wishaw constituency to access and participate in cultural activities. (S6O-03521)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Through our support of the Culture Collective programme, run by Creative Scotland, we supported Reeltime Music, which is based in Motherwell. Reeltime Music was awarded more than £270,000 to deliver a project that included working with communities in Motherwell, Glenboig, Airdrie and Bellshill, and to deliver region-wide projects with partners including Lanarkshire Deaf Club. Our youth music initiative access to music making fund also provided support for a music project in Wishaw, through Glencassels Community Development Project.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Because of Brexit, we have lost a number of extraordinary European Union cultural exchange programmes, which I know that Reeltime Music and Glencassels have in the past taken part in. The Tories and Labour have rejected proposals from the EU for freedom of movement for under-30s, again denying generations of young people wonderful opportunities. Will the minister set out the Scottish Government’s priorities for giving opportunities to young people through cultural exchange?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The loss of access to the creative Europe programme has indeed had a major impact on young artists. The programme played a vital role in facilitating international cultural collaboration, which helped young artists to develop cross-border networks, to share knowledge and to learn from their peers.

The Scottish Government is calling on the United Kingdom Conservative Government and any incoming Labour Government to rejoin creative Europe as a priority. We also urge the UK Government to engage positively with the European Commission’s proposal to open negotiations with it on youth mobility and to constructively negotiate a deep and generous agreement with the European Union.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Elena Whitham joins us remotely.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what its assessment is of any impact that Brexit is having on Scotland’s culture sector. (S6O-03522)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The United Kingdom Government’s decision to leave the European Union has ended freedom of movement. Along with the UK Government’s failure to negotiate with the EU a mobility agreement for creative professionals, that is making vital international activities such as touring in Europe far more difficult. Creative professionals now face barriers including visa and customs requirements, and restrictions on haulage. The loss of the creative Europe programme, which plays a unique and vital role in facilitating international cultural collaboration and developing cross-border networks, has meant that the opportunities for people in the sector to work and build relationships internationally are, sadly, more limited.

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

A few years into the disaster that is Brexit, we are better placed to assess and even measure lost opportunities. Will the cabinet secretary outline any analysis of the damage done to brand Scotland and our status as a leading nation for culture by the impact of Brexit on performers and artists?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

As a Government, we engage closely with stakeholders from across the culture sector to assess the full impact of Brexit. We have repeatedly heard of creative professionals leaving the sector because of barriers to international opportunities, as well as hearing of international artists facing difficulties coming here.

We recently held a consultation on our international culture strategy, in which a wide range of stakeholders detailed the impact of leaving the European Union on Scotland’s culture sector. A good first step to turning all that around would be for the United Kingdom to rejoin creative Europe.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Several cultural organisations in Scotland have reported a decline in the ability to deliver their services. That is not because of Brexit but because of the Scottish National Party Government’s inability to provide adequate funding to the sector. Does the cabinet secretary accept that his Government’s funding failures have negatively impacted the sector?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

That is a curious intervention from a party that is cutting culture spending in the rest of the United Kingdom, when the Scottish Government is increasing it. I know that, deep in his heart, Alexander Stewart supports the Scottish Government’s efforts to raise spending on culture. I hope that I can continue to have his support, his party’s support and support from across the chamber in increasing spending on culture.

The Scottish Government has committed to a £100 million boost to culture spending in Scotland, which is in stark contrast to the United Kingdom Government’s cuts to culture in England and, indeed, to the Labour Government’s cuts to culture in Wales.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether Creative Scotland’s funding will be increased during the next financial year. (S6O-03523)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I am pleased that the First Minister, when he was setting out his priorities for Scotland on 22 May, recommitted to investing at least £100 million more annually in culture and the arts by the financial year 2028-29.

As the finance secretary set out in her budget speech in December, the increases that we have provided this year were our first step on the route to investing at least £100 million more in the arts and culture by 2028-29. Our aim is to increase arts and culture investment in 2025-26, the next financial year, by at least a further £25 million.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

In October 2023, the then First Minister pledged to double arts spending during the period of Creative Scotland’s next funding programme, but we are now faced with a stark reality. Creative Scotland has received bids that are worth £87.5 million for its multiyear funding programme, yet only £40 million is available, which is a significant shortfall. The shortfall puts many of Scotland’s theatres, music venues and festivals at risk, and it could lead to Creative Scotland rejecting 55 per cent of applications. At the same time, the body has been criticised for giving funding to an explicit show. That has received significant backlash and has inevitably lowered public confidence. Will the cabinet secretary outline whether the Scottish Government will take any action to ensure that funding is given to projects that are deemed appropriate?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I think that Sharon Dowey knows that it is not for the Scottish Government to give individual grant funding to cultural organisations. We have separation of Government from arts funding in this country. That is why we have an arm’s-length cultural funding organisation, which is called Creative Scotland. It is important that we have that separation. I thought that, until now, we had party consensus on all that.

However, I think that we are agreed that we want to ensure that organisations—whether it is Creative Scotland or directly funded cultural organisations such as our national performing companies—receive the funding that they require. As I have already committed to, and as the First Minister has committed to, we are set to increase funding for culture in Scotland. That is a good thing and stands in stark contrast to what the United Kingdom Conservative Government is doing in England and what Labour is doing in Wales.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

Following standstill funding, Creative Scotland will be able to fund only an estimated 45 per cent of long-term funding applications. Along with that, we have been waiting 18 months for the overhaul of long-term cultural funding from Creative Scotland, after that was postponed due to a lack of confidence or clarity about its future finances. Does the cabinet secretary agree that Creative Scotland needs clarity on its long-term funding so that our creative organisations can be secure in their future?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I agree that major funding changes are going through at present. I think that there is still cross-party consensus that multi-annual funding for our cultural organisations that are funded through Creative Scotland is a good thing. Creative Scotland is trailblazing in that respect. Other parts of the third sector do not receive multi-annual funding. It is important that Creative Scotland is able to introduce that approach, and I wish it well in doing that.

I think that the member understands, and perhaps Sharon Dowey also understands, that cultural organisations, in response to a call for funding, have asked for the maximum funding that they can receive. I understand that. We all need to operate within our means, but the means that we are putting at the disposal of the culture and arts sector in Scotland are going up. They are being cut in England under the Tories, and they are being cut in Wales under Labour.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

The funding that has been mentioned affirms the Scottish Government’s confidence in the Scottish culture sector and the principles of its culture strategy. With that in mind, what recent calls has the cabinet secretary made to the UK Government to match that stated ambition and increase its investment in arts and culture?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I have repeatedly written to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and I have spoken with her, to highlight the importance of providing adequate support to the sector.

At the first meeting of the culture and creative industries interministerial group on 2 May, I highlighted to the secretary of state from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport the challenges that the sector faces as a result of financial constraints and the need for the UK Government to provide adequate investment in the sector. I also discussed existing initiatives to support the sector that could be built on, including tax relief in the sector.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is portfolio questions on justice and home affairs. Again, I would appreciate succinct questions and answers in order to allow as many members to have the opportunity to get in as possible.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address the needs and welfare of women prisoners, in light of the reported challenges arising from a growing prison population. (S6O-03524)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The needs and welfare of all those in our care remains a key priority for the Scottish Government and the Scottish Prison Service. The SPS continues to manage those in custody with a person-centred approach and, together with its partners, to deliver a range of trauma-informed support and services to women in custody to meet their specific needs.

However, I have been clear that the critical pressures that the Prison Service experiences and their impact on women and men in prison as well as staff require urgent action. That is why I laid regulations before Parliament last week to seek approval to use the emergency release power in the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

It is welcome that the Scottish Prison Service is committed to becoming a more trauma-informed organisation. With that in mind, what steps is the service taking through the use of available technology to help create safe and secure environments, where doing so is viable?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The Scottish Prison Service has invested in technologies to support its commitment to safety and security and to becoming a trauma-informed organisation. Rapiscan machines, which are available in every prison, and body scanners, which are available in 11 establishments, further enhance our comprehensive suite of security measures that are deployed to keep our prisons safe. However, the SPS remains vigilant to the threat that is posed through the introduction of contraband and ensures that applied tactical measures complement the use of those technologies.

Advancements in technology have also allowed the SPS to roll out in-cell telephony throughout its estate. That facility supports positive mental health and wellbeing for those in the service’s care, creating a holistic approach to security and to being trauma informed.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Women are routinely being strip-searched in Scottish prisons, despite ministers saying, five years ago, that the practice would be reduced. The cabinet secretary will know that the practice is particularly retraumatising for female prisoners who have suffered abuse in the past. Only this morning, Wendy Sinclair-Gieben, the chief inspector of prisons, wrote to the cabinet secretary, asking for the practice to stop. Linda Allan , whose daughter Katie took her own life in Polmont prison, said that repeated strip-searching was a major factor in her death. How quickly does the cabinet secretary think that the practice can come to an end?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I have already been in correspondence with the chief inspector of prisons with regard to this very serious matter. I, of course, share the chief inspector’s concerns, although it must be noted that the chief inspector has acknowledged that there can be a legitimate role for body searching, if there is robust intelligence or robust reasonable grounds.

The member’s point about the importance of trauma-informed practice also relates to my answer to Ms Tweed about advancing the use of technology, because the use of body scanners, for example, reduces the need for body searches. I am committed to continuing to engage not just with the inspector, but with the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service, with whom I have had a conversation on the matter. I have sought further assurances that body searching will be used only where there are robust grounds and robust intelligence, and I am due to have further discussions with the Scottish Prison Service on the matter.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Natalie Beal, the governor of HMP Glenochil, has said that it is becoming increasingly difficult to deal with prisoners in their 60s and 70s. In 2018, the Scottish Prison Service spent £636,000 on prisoner social care, but that had trebled to £2.1 million by 2022. Given the growing population in Scottish prisons, what action is the Scottish Government taking to deal with the increasingly complex needs of the prison population?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I am grateful to Ms Dowey for raising that important point. I have discussed the matter in a number of previous statements to the Parliament. Ms Beal is quite correct, in that the prison population is not just increasing but becoming increasingly elderly, and that comes with significant health and social care needs. As I have previously stated to Parliament, there is engagement with the SPS and the cross-Government prison healthcare group on how we can better address the needs of community safety and security in our establishments and ensure better care for elderly long-term prisoners.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

To ask the Scottish Government what role the Scottish Government resilience room would play in the event of a major nuclear incident. (S6O-03525)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Civil and defence nuclear safety are reserved matters. However, the Scottish Government holds responsibility for the off-site consequence management of a nuclear incident effect in Scotland.

The Scottish Government resilience room is the Scottish Government’s central co-ordination mechanism for responding to civil contingencies and complex emergencies. In the case of a major nuclear incident, that mechanism would activate to facilitate an effective Scottish Government response to the incident. The resilience room would provide Scottish ministers and senior officials with situational awareness, facilitate Government co-ordination and support communication with responders at all levels in Scotland and, of course, with the United Kingdom Government.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

As the cabinet secretary is aware, the UK’s nuclear submarine fleet is based at Faslane, which is 25 miles from Glasgow. In the event of a major nuclear incident, the Ministry of Defence’s conservative projections suggest wholesale evacuation within a 30-mile radius and a shelter warning for everyone extended over a 75-mile radius. Given the increasing frequency of nuclear incidents on the Clyde and the very real danger to life that that could present, does the minister agree that all parties in the Parliament should work together in calling for the removal of nuclear weapons from Scotland?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I am, of course, in favour of all parties working together. The Scottish Government’s position on nuclear weapons is clear and long-standing: we are firmly opposed to the possession, threat and use of nuclear weapons. They are strategically and economically wrong; they are indiscriminate and devastating in their impacts; and their use would bring unspeakable humanitarian suffering and widespread environmental damage.

The Scottish Government has consistently expressed a commitment to removing nuclear weapons from Scotland in the safest and most expeditious manner possible, following a vote for independence. That position was last set out in the recent paper in the “Building a New Scotland” series, “An independent Scotland’s place in the world”.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to Police Scotland to tackle violent crimes in local communities. (S6O-03526)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The latest Scottish crime and justice survey results show a 58 per cent fall in violent crime since 2008-09, with an increase in the number of adults feeling safe in their local communities over the same time. We welcome that encouraging progress, but we are not complacent. Despite difficult financial circumstances due to United Kingdom Government austerity, our budget for 2024-25 includes record police funding of £1.55 billion, which is an increase of nearly £93 million. That investment is ensuring that Scotland continues to have more police officers per capita than England and Wales, with 30 officers per 10,000 of the population at 31 March 2024, compared with 24 officers per 10,000 of the population in England and Wales at 30 September 2023.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

The police quarterly report that was presented to East Renfrewshire Council confirmed that there continued to be an overall increase in non-sexual crimes of violence in East Renfrewshire, with the figure up to 68 from the 55 offences that were recorded for the same period in the previous year. I think that the cabinet secretary and I entered Parliament at the same time, in 2007. She will remember that the proudest boast of her Government by the end of that session of Parliament was that it had increased police numbers by 1,000 officers. Obviously, therefore, I am dismayed to find that we now have the lowest level of police numbers since 2008.

To tackle violent crimes in East Renfrewshire and across Scotland, does the cabinet secretary not agree that increasing the number of police officers should once again be a priority for the Scottish Government to help to keep our local communities safe?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I assure Mr Carlaw that policing most certainly remains a key priority of this Government. However, I am concerned to hear of the monthly reports on violent crime in his constituency. The longer-term trend shows that, from 2006-07 to 2022-23, there was a 36 per cent reduction in violent crime in his constituency. That reduction was greater than the 25 per cent reduction in the country as a whole.

Nonetheless, I take seriously Mr Carlaw’s concerns about the recent fluctuation in the monthly figures. He might be reassured to know that, as of 31 March this year, there were 2,459 officers in G division, which covers his constituency. That is 72 more officers than there were in the previous quarter.

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

Will the cabinet secretary provide an update regarding the steps that are being taken to ensure that, despite the deeply challenging financial circumstances due to the United Kingdom Government’s financial settlement, the increased Scottish Police Authority resource budget supports further police recruitment?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Although the recruitment and deployment of police officers is, of course, a matter for the chief constable, I am reassured that she is taking action to get the number of officers up to between 16,500 and 16,600. More than 310 new officers have commenced their training this year, and there are plans to recruit a further 840 new officers between July and the end of March.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I recently met East Kilbride victims of teen violence, which is a group of local residents who have been affected and shocked by recent events in the town. Will the cabinet secretary outline the work that the Scottish Government is taking forward, alongside the police, with important organisations including the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit and Medics Against Violence? How can their expertise be used in towns such as East Kilbride, where police data shows that there has been a significant rise in youth violence?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I share Collette Stevenson’s concern about youth crime. I understand that Police Scotland is investigating incidents in East Kilbride and that it has deployed additional patrols to reassure the community.

Through our violence prevention framework, we are supporting a programme of action, backed by over £2 million this year, to prevent and reduce violence across Scotland. In East Kilbride, the funding is supporting the targeted work of Medics Against Violence and No Knives, Better Lives to prevent youth violence in the first place.

Although such problems should be of concern to each and every one of us in the chamber, I hope that Collette Stevenson can take some reassurance from the fact that, as I have highlighted, there has been an overall reduction in youth crime and crime generally, with violent crime having decreased by 58 per cent since 2008-09.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Question 4 was not lodged.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Police Scotland in relation to its guidance on recording non-crime hate incidents. (S6O-03528)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

On 9 May 2024, Police Scotland published its interim guidance on responding to hate crime, which includes information on the recording and handling of non-crime hate incidents. Although the recording of non-crime hate incidents and the development of guidance are operational matters for Police Scotland, the chief constable and I discussed the matter when we met on 30 April.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am aware that, following concerns that I and others raised about the lawfulness of Police Scotland’s policy on recording non-crime hate incidents, it has now changed its policy to bring it into line with the Miller judgment. Police Scotland appears to have done so from 1 April, but it took it another five weeks to update its policy and tell anyone that it was changing. Only then was its website updated. Although that change is welcome, what will happen to all the non-crime hate incidents that were recorded under the old policy, which Police Scotland has tacitly accepted was unlawful?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I reassure Mr Fraser that I have discussed the matter not only with the chief constable; I have also taken the opportunity to discuss it at length with Martyn Evans, the chair of the Scottish Police Authority board, because the SPA has a crucial role in scrutinising Police Scotland operational matters.

Obviously, I take very seriously concerns that are expressed in the chamber. I do not think that Police Scotland would have the same interpretation of what is lawful or unlawful as Mr Fraser has articulated but, given that the detail of the policy is firmly located in an operational space, I will ask the chief constable or the chair of the SPA to reply directly to Mr Fraser on that point.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that the Scottish justice system is “close to collapse” and that solicitors are taking industrial action. (S6O-03529)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I am aware of the position that has been adopted by the Scottish Solicitors Bar Association. Legal aid solicitors play a crucial role in our justice system, which is why, since 2021, there has been investment of £31 million in legal aid. We will continue to work with the legal profession and others to identify measures to improve and reform Scotland’s legal aid system.

We will continue to work with and support our justice partners in achieving the outcomes described in “The Vision for Justice in Scotland” by taking forward a programme to drive key areas of reform, including criminal justice efficiency under a criminal justice efficiency programme. The 2024-25 budget provides almost £3.8 billion to be invested across the justice system.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I thank the minister for that answer. One of the reasons for the industrial action is the Scottish Government’s proposal in the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill for a pilot of rape trials being conducted by a single judge without a jury. The proposed pilot trials have had a mixed reaction from victims and survivors of rape. Survivors have shared with the Criminal Justice Committee their concerns that not even judges are without unconscious bias and that decisions will rest with one judge. It is clear that the Scottish Government has not been able to secure widespread support for the pilot project from the legal sector or survivors, so will the minister support amendments at stage 2 to remove the provisions from the legislation?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The cabinet secretary will consider the stage 1 recommendations from the Criminal Justice Committee and stakeholders.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Can the minister reaffirm that the Scottish Government is committed to the principle of legal aid, which ensures that free legal services are available to those who are most in need?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

Yes, the Scottish Government remains committed to the principle of legal aid. We have maintained resourcing of legal aid and have not actually cut its availability. It is a demand-led budget that is directly linked to application numbers; all those who are eligible will continue to benefit from legal aid.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether there are excessive delays in holding fatal accident inquiries. (S6O-03530)

The Solicitor General for Scotland (Ruth Charteris KC)

The decision to hold a fatal accident inquiry is taken after thorough and independent investigation, the timeframe for which depends on the nature and circumstances of the death. There are often legitimate reasons for prolonged investigation, including the need to await the outcome of investigations by reporting agencies, to consider reports from agencies or to instruct expert evidence.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has significantly reformed its processes in recent years to improve the quality of death investigations and to reduce the time taken to investigate deaths and bring FAIs to court. However, in some cases FAIs have simply taken too long to commence. We appreciate and very much regret the impact that waiting for investigations to conclude has on families.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

What faith can bereaved families have in the justice system when they have to wait, in some cases for eight years, before an FAI is held and are fobbed off with explanations that appear to have come from “The Bumper Book of Excuses”? Will the Solicitor General or the Lord Advocate therefore come before Parliament and give a full statement so that Parliament as a whole can scrutinise this failure of the current system?

The Solicitor General for Scotland

I recognise that all families who have lost a loved one rightly expect investigations into the death to be progressed as expeditiously as possible. I offer my sincere apologies to all families who have simply waited too long for FAI proceedings to commence.

We want to do better. To that end, we have been working hard to make changes, and significant modernisation has taken place. For example, criminal investigations and related wider death investigations now proceed in parallel, so that FAIs can begin swiftly after the conclusion of criminal proceedings. We are working with specialists and other partner agencies to reduce the time that it takes to conclude investigations. Every death investigation that is more than two years old and deaths in custody are monitored by senior management through a case-management panel process. We have also instituted a death investigations improvement board.

Death investigations are a difficult, sensitive and hugely important area of work that the COPFS strives to do well. There are inherent challenges in death investigations, which are not unique to Scotland. There are clear indications that the situation is improving. However, neither I nor the Lord Advocate are beyond self reflection. If there is a need for a statement, either of us would be happy to do so.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Typically, a few dozen FAIs take place each year, while all other deaths are considered behind closed doors at the Crown Office. Compare that with the situation in England and Wales, where tens of thousands of coroners’ inquests are held in public. Families keep being failed by Scotland’s slow and ineffective system of investigating sudden, suspicious, accidental or unexplained deaths.

Does the solicitor general agree that a root-and-branch review of FAIs is needed?

The Solicitor General for Scotland

In our system, the Lord Advocate will instruct a discretionary fatal accident inquiry where it is in the public interest that one be held. Those are in addition to FAIs that are compulsory being held.

Every year, we investigate a large number of deaths. This year, we have dealt with approximately 14 deaths, the majority of which concluded within 12 weeks. In many cases, it is simply the case that there are no lessons to be learned from the tragedy and it is enough that the family is made aware of what happened to their loved one.

Scotland is not the only jurisdiction where a small number of complex deaths can take a long time to properly investigate. Although coroners’ inquests begin rapidly in England, they still take many years to reach conclusions. That is not to diminish or dismiss the responsibility for investigating deaths as quickly as possible and for placing the dignity of the deceased and their families at the heart of the process.

I can speak only for the work that is being carried out by the dedicated, experienced and independent team in the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, which—as I have indicated—is working hard to make changes and bring forward an increase in speed.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the implementation of the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 since it came into force on 1 April 2024. (S6O-03531)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 sends a strong message to victims, perpetrators and communities that offences that are motivated by prejudice will not be tolerated. The act consolidates, maintains and extends protections that are aggravated by prejudice, as well as including stirring up of hatred offences for all characteristics covered in the hate crime legislative framework.

The offence of stirring up racial hatred has been in Scots law since 1986. We have worked closely with Police Scotland and other justice partners to ensure the 2021 act’s effective implementation, and we will continue to do so.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I have been liaising with Police Scotland about engagement with women’s groups on the implications of the hate crime act for their lawful meetings. Disappointingly, Police Scotland has indicated to me that it will not participate in that vital engagement while it is in the process of developing longer-term policies around the 2021 act.

Does the minister or the cabinet secretary agree that input from women’s groups should influence the process and should not occur after it has concluded? Will the minister and the cabinet secretary make representations to Police Scotland to ensure that women’s voices are heard?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

Yes, I agree. We have been told that Police Scotland will consult internally and externally.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Police Scotland data shows us that the volume of reports has consistently reduced week on week. Does the cabinet secretary believe that the early high numbers of reports were due to widespread misinformation about the 2021 act, including, unfortunately, from members in the chamber?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

Recent Police Scotland data shows that the volume of reports at week 7 has reduced by more than 99 per cent from the first week of the act’s commencement. The fact that we have seen so many reports since implementation reinforces the importance of the hate crime act.

Although the commentary surrounding the act during its implementation included misrepresentation, it is important to remember that the act was passed by 82 members of the Parliament. People and communities who are at the sharp end of hatred in their daily lives, simply for being who they are, should rightly look to this Parliament to stand with them, which the Scottish Government will continue to do.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes portfolio questions on justice and home affairs. There will be a very short pause to allow front-bench teams to change positions.

Business Motions

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-13493, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees—

(a) the following programme of business—

Tuesday 11 June 2024

2.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Topical Questions (if selected)

followed by Scottish Government Debate: Scottish Government Priorities: Eradicating Child Poverty

followed by Committee Announcements

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Wednesday 12 June 2024

2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic; Finance and Local Government

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)

7.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Thursday 13 June 2024

11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

11.40 am General Questions

12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions

followed by Members’ Business

2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.30 pm Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Questions

2.45 pm Portfolio Questions: Net Zero and Energy, and Transport

followed by Scottish Government Debate: Scottish Government Priorities: Investing in Scotland’s Public Services

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

Tuesday 18 June 2024

2.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Topical Questions (if selected)

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill

followed by Committee Announcements

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

9.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Wednesday 19 June 2024

2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care

followed by Scottish Government Business

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Thursday 20 June 2024

11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

11.40 am General Questions

12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions

followed by Members’ Business

2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Social Justice

followed by Scottish Government Business

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Gender Representation on Public Boards (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

4.30 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

(b) that, for the purposes of Portfolio Questions in the week beginning 10 June 2024, in rule 13.7.3, after the word “except” the words “to the extent to which the Presiding Officer considers that the questions are on the same or similar subject matter or” are inserted.—[Jamie Hepburn]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I call Liz Smith to speak to and move amendment S6M-13493.1.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

It is my understanding that, prior to the Presiding Officer’s selection of my topical question yesterday, the Minister for Parliamentary Business had intended to schedule a statement about the recent reports in the media that the Scottish Government would be handing back £450 million of European Union funds that are available for investment projects in Scotland.

Yesterday, in her answers, the Deputy First Minister told Parliament that those reports are untrue and that almost all of the allocated funds will be spent. She added:

“we will endeavour to spend as much of it as possible.”—[Official Report, 4 June 2024; c 3.]

That is hardly the most convincing line about the detail of the allocations of the money.

The Deputy First Minister added that 60 per cent of the available funds had been earmarked for local government investment projects, but there was no detail, nor did she elaborate on the Scottish Government’s acknowledgement that the initial available budget was reduced by €72 million because there had been a lack of demand or a lack of ability to spend the money.

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

Does Liz Smith accept that the programme still has at least a year to run? If all the money had been spent by now, that would be somewhat dubious, considering that there is still a year left of the programme.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I have spent quite a lot of this morning reading up on the EU rules on this, and I understand what is being asked for, but I remind the Deputy First Minister that the Scottish Government has already handed back €199 million. I am asking for clarity and that is what the rest of the Parliament is asking for. If the Deputy First Minister is saying that the £450 million figure is inaccurate, she must have some idea of what the actual figure is. The Parliament ought to know what that money is and what it has been earmarked for.

I am asking for a statement so that we can be provided with further information and can scrutinise what the Scottish Government is saying on the matter. To come back to the point that I made yesterday, if money has been available, we ought to know about it and we ought to be able to tell local government and all the people who have been involved, for example, in enterprise budgets, exactly where that money is. If we are not doing that, we are not being transparent or ensuring that this Parliament is looking after the public.

I move amendment S6M-13493.1, to leave out from third “followed by Business Motions” to second “5.00 pm Decision Time” and insert—

“followed by Ministerial Statement: Allocation of EU Structural Funds

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.30 pm Decision Time”.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I rise in support of the appeal to change the business motion for the following key reasons. The first is the quantum of the sums involved. We are talking about hundreds of millions of pounds of funding. Although the absolute figure might be disputed, it is potentially up to around 1 per cent of the Scottish Government’s budget.

We know that many of the figures are a matter of published fact—they have been published by the EU itself. We also know that many of the funding mechanisms are technical and dependent on match funding and other factors.

Finally, there is the matter of timing. Although there is the claim that there is a year to go, there is at the very least speculation that some of those deadlines are looming as soon as the end of June. Given the matter of the quantum, comparison with published fact, the technical nature of the funding and the timelines, I believe that a topical question at the start of this week is inadequate to answer those questions. Parliament needs a statement so that we can interrogate the facts and due to the significant concern and the significant sums of money that are involved.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I call the minister to respond on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

It is the case that I received a request from the Conservative Party to schedule a ministerial statement on EU structural funds for this week. I wrote to business managers to explain that I had intended to schedule the statement as requested but given that a topical question on EU structural funds had been selected and was asked yesterday, I felt that it was no longer required. After writing that letter to all business managers, I received no response from the Conservative Party business manager to my note, nor did he particularly push for the statement when it was discussed in the bureau. Otherwise, we could have discussed the request in more detail.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Is it not the case that, following the topical question, it would appear from the contributions from either side of the chamber that further questions have arisen and that a statement is the appropriate vehicle for the Parliament to hold the Scottish Government to account?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

There are many mechanisms and means by which members can do that. I note that Mr Johnson said that the topical question was not enough. I am unaware of whether Mr Johnson—he can get to his feet and tell me now—pressed his button to seek to ask a question at topical question time on Tuesday.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Does the minister accept that sometimes the facts change? When the facts change, so should his position. Does he not accept that, given that further questions have arisen, more questions should be permitted in the chamber?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The fact is that Mr Johnson did not bother to press his button yesterday to seek to ask a question. In the short period in which I have held the office that I hold now, I have sought to be reasonable in responding to requests from other parties. Earlier today, we had a statement on low-emission zones, following a request by the Conservative Party. Last week, we had a statement on industrial action in Scotland’s colleges, following a request by the Labour Party. I brought the timetabling of those requests to the bureau and made sure that those requests could be accommodated.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

I say for the record, because the minutes of the bureau do not go into the detail that would allow what was said to be reflected, that I did say that we would reserve our position on the business motion, as we are doing today, if the answers to the topical question were not sufficient. I made that clear at the bureau and I would like that to be reflected on the record now.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I am making the point—I make it again—that I am a reasonable person. If we had had a fuller discussion, we could have considered scheduling the statement. Party business managers can bring such matters to the bureau, and members surely have to entrust those responsibilities to the business managers. Of course, I recognise and respect the right of members to do so, but it is my hope that we will not see continual attempts to amend business that is presented by the bureau for Parliament’s agreement. Those matters have been discussed and agreed by the bureau.

I will, at all times, operate on the basis of seeking to facilitate fair and reasonable requests, just as I had been ready to with the one that was made in respect of EU structural funds.

As I mentioned, there has been a topical question on the matter already this week. Indeed, Liz Smith asked that question, and the Deputy First Minister gave a full answer to her on the issue. The answer was so full that Ms Smith was able to regale us with the details today.

It is very clear that the suggestion that the Government will not allocate £450 million of available EU funding for investment projects in Scotland is incorrect, as the programme is not yet complete. Indeed, partners have always had access to the funding that they requested. Final expenditure figures for that funding will be published and reported to Parliament as soon as they are finalised. I see no reason for scheduling a further statement, which will only reconfirm the position that has now been outlined twice to the chamber in the past two days.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The question is, that amendment S6M-13493.1, in the name of Liz Smith, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13493, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division. There will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We come to the vote on amendment S6M-13493.1, in the name of Liz Smith. Members should cast their vote now.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on amendment S6M-13493.1, in the name of Liz Smith, is: For 55, Against 56, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-13493, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme, be agreed to.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees—

(a) the following programme of business—

Tuesday 11 June 2024

2.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Topical Questions (if selected)

followed by Scottish Government Debate: Scottish Government Priorities: Eradicating Child Poverty

followed by Committee Announcements

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Wednesday 12 June 2024

2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic; Finance and Local Government

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)

7.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Thursday 13 June 2024

11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

11.40 am General Questions

12.00 pm First Minister's Questions

followed by Members’ Business

2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.30 pm Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Questions

2.45 pm Portfolio Questions: Net Zero and Energy, and Transport

followed by Scottish Government Debate: Scottish Government Priorities: Investing in Scotland's Public Services

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

Tuesday 18 June 2024

2.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Topical Questions (if selected)

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill

followed by Committee Announcements

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

9.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Wednesday 19 June 2024

2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care

followed by Scottish Government Business

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Thursday 20 June 2024

11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

11.40 am General Questions

12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions

followed by Members’ Business

2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Social Justice

followed by Scottish Government Business

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Gender Representation on Public Boards (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

4.30 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

(b) that, for the purposes of Portfolio Questions in the week beginning 10 June 2024, in rule 13.7.3, after the word “except” the words “to the extent to which the Presiding Officer considers that the questions are on the same or similar subject matter or” are inserted.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-13494, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on a stage 1 extension for a bill.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees that consideration of the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1 be extended to 13 September 2024.—[Jamie Hepburn]

Motion agreed to.

Decision Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There are 10 questions to be put as a result of today’s business. The first question is, that amendment S6M-13480.3, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13480, in the name of Graham Simpson, on improving Scotland’s roads, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division. I ask members to refresh their voting app and, after that, to proceed to cast their votes.

The vote is closed.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The app lost its connection and I was not able to cast a vote. I would have voted yes.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Ms Thomson. We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on amendment S6M-13480.3, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, is: For 56, Against 55, Abstentions 0.

Amendment agreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that amendment S6M-13480.2, in the name of Alex Rowley, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13480, in the name of Graham Simpson, on improving Scotland’s roads, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on amendment S6M-13480.2, in the name of Alex Rowley, is: For 56, Against 56, Abstentions 0.

The vote is tied. As is usual when the Parliament has not been able to reach a decision, I am obliged to exercise a casting vote. I will not make a decision for the Parliament. The established convention is for the chair to vote in favour of the status quo, as the chair is required to act impartially. Therefore, I cast my vote against the amendment.

Amendment disagreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-13480, in the name of Graham Simpson, on improving Scotland’s roads, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app would not connect. I would have voted no.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Mr Mountain. We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on motion S6M-13480, in the name of Graham Simpson, on improving Scotland’s roads, as amended, is: For 57, Against 55, Abstentions 0.

Motion, as amended, agreed to,

That the Parliament acknowledges the importance of a well-maintained road network to Scotland’s economy; notes that the procurement process for the construction of the A9 Dualling Tay Crossing to Ballinluig project has now started, and that the contract for the A9 Dualling Tomatin to Moy project is on track to achieve contract award early in summer 2024; further notes that the statutory authorisation process is now complete for the A96 Dualling Inverness to Nairn (including Nairn Bypass) project, which will enable the purchase of land required to build the project; notes that the Scottish Government is delivering a range of measures in the short, medium and long term to reduce the risk of impact of landslides at the A83 Rest and Be Thankful; further notes that the procurement of technical advisors is underway to take forward design work on Springholm and Crocketford Bypasses on the A75; notes that investment in safely operating and maintaining the trunk road network will increase from over £525 million in 2023-24 to over £683 million in 2024-25, which is an increase of over 30%; further notes the ongoing commitment to Scotland’s 2030 road safety targets, with a record £36 million earmarked for investment, including £10 million for the local road network through the Road Safety Improvement Fund; agrees that the funding in the UK Spring Budget falls far short of what Scotland needs to deliver improvements to Scotland’s infrastructure, and will result in a reduction in real terms of the Scottish block grant for capital of 8.7% by 2027-28, and calls on the incoming UK administration to bring forward an emergency budget to address this hole in Scotland’s capital budget of over £1.3 billion.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I remind members that, if the amendment in the name of Máiri McAllan is agreed to, the amendments in the name of Sarah Boyack, Patrick Harvie and Liam McArthur will fall.

The next question is, that amendment S6M-13482.4, in the name of Máiri McAllan, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13482, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, on recognising the contribution of Scotland’s oil and gas industry, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am having trouble with my phone and could not connect. I would have voted no.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Mr Mountain. We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 56, Against 56, Abstentions 0.

The vote is tied. As the established convention is for the chair to vote in favour of the status quo, I cast my vote against the amendment.

Amendment disagreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is on the amendment in the name of Sarah Boyack. I remind members that, if the amendment in the name of Sarah Boyack is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Liam McArthur will fall.

The question is, that amendment S6M-13482.1, in the name of Sarah Boyack, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13482, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, on recognising the contribution of Scotland’s oil and gas industry, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 19, Against 94, Abstentions 1.

Amendment disagreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I remind members that, if the amendment in the name of Patrick Harvie is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Liam McArthur will fall.

The question is, that amendment S6M-13482.2, in the name of Patrick Harvie, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13482, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, on recognising the contribution of Scotland’s oil and gas industry, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My apologies; connection to the app on my phone was lost. I would have voted no to the amendment.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Ms Constance. We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 7, Against 107, Abstentions 0.

Amendment disagreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that amendment S6M-13482.3, in the name of Liam McArthur, which seeks to amend motion S6M-13482, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, on recognising the contribution of Scotland’s oil and gas industry, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 79, Against 34, Abstentions 1.

Amendment agreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-13482, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, on recognising the contribution of Scotland’s oil and gas industry, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 106, Against 7, Abstentions 0.

Motion, as amended , agreed to,

That the Parliament recognises the invaluable contribution that oil and gas makes to Scotland, with the industry supporting 94,000 jobs and providing over £10 billion in revenue in 2022-23; recognises that there is a climate emergency and that it is essential that Scotland meets its net zero targets by 2045 and drives down its reliance on fossil fuels; believes that the phasing down of the traditional oil and gas sector must be done hand in hand with the expansion of renewables and the creation of green jobs, using the wealth of talent and skills available, in order to ensure that communities are not left behind, and further believes that, in order to achieve a successful just transition, both of Scotland’s governments must work together, and with the oil and gas and renewables sectors, so that change can be managed properly and effectively.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-13495, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Ms Clark. We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 85, Against 0, Abstentions 27.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees that the Sea Fisheries (Remote Electronic Monitoring and Regulation of Scallop Fishing) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 [draft] be approved.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The final question is, that motion S6M-13496, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on approval of a statement of principles, be agreed to.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees that the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman: Child-friendly Complaint Handling Statement of Principles (SPSO/2024/01) be approved.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes decision time.

Members’ business will be published tomorrow, 6 June 2024, as soon as the text is available.

Low-emission Zones

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Fiona Hyslop on protecting public health and improving air quality. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

When it comes to protecting health and tackling the climate emergency, which all of us in Parliament claim to have an interest in and which we say is a priority, the warm words and rhetoric are the easy part. The hard bit is taking action.

I recall that, when the Transport (Scotland) Bill was discussed in Parliament in 2019, Liam Kerr, a Conservative, stated:

“We believe that low-emission zone schemes are a good thing”—[Official Report, 10 October 2019; c 105.]

Colin Smyth, a Labour member, was very supportive. He said:

“The proposals on low-emission zones introduce a much-needed framework … and they are very welcome.”—[Official Report, 10 October 2019; c 94-95.]

Showing that the support extended across all parties, Mike Rumbles, a Liberal Democrat, said:

“There are good measures in the bill, such as … the creation of low-emission zones.”—[Official Report, 10 October 2019; c 99.]

The Government will never shy away from taking the tough action that is required to protect the health of the most vulnerable or from tackling the biggest threat that our planet faces. I am therefore pleased to inform members that, after several years of development and planning, we now have low-emission zones operating in our four largest cities, keeping the most polluting vehicles out of our city centres and protecting our citizens.

I will address the comments that Liam Kerr made in the chamber when he asked for the statement. He asked what flexibility local authorities have with regard to low-emission zones. The four cities were responsible for the design of, planning for and consultation on their LEZs. Each local authority gained relevant committee approval prior to submitting its LEZ scheme to the Scottish ministers for approval. The local authority has the flexibility to determine the geographical area of the LEZ, the types of vehicles that are within its scope, the length of grace periods and the granting of local time-limited exemptions. It also has the power to vary the hours of operation away from the default position of 24/7 and it may make amendments to or revoke an LEZ, subject to the Scottish ministers’ approval.

The Scottish Government is committed to low-emission zones as they are a significant public health intervention. I am sure that, with time, the introduction of our low-emission zones will be considered a watershed moment and held in the same regard as the smoking ban and, before that, the ban on lead in petrol. LEZs are an obvious, sensible and essential intervention to protect everyone’s health, but particularly that of young children, the elderly and those with underlying health conditions.

The benefits of better air quality are well understood, with further evidence being published continually. Members will be aware that the University of Dundee recently published a study on hospital respiratory admissions in the Tayside area. It found that respiratory admissions of children were significantly associated with elevated levels of air pollution in the area. The lead researcher on the study, Professor Jill Belch, has been very clear about the harmful effects of air pollution on the brains and lungs of babies and children. We simply cannot condemn our future generations to disease and infection when a limited and targeted intervention such as low-emission zones can make a difference. Experts around the world agree that measures such as LEZs are essential to tackle air pollution and, therefore, protect children and the most vulnerable.

We can rightly be proud of the important role that our city centres play in promoting Scotland for business and trade, attracting tourism and being the places of entertainment and nightlife that we all enjoy. However, they are also places where large numbers of people live and spend time. We want our city centres to continue to thrive, so we must be responsible and do what we can to reduce pollution in those areas. In banning only a minority of the most polluting vehicles, LEZs will deliver air quality improvements by specifically targeting those vehicles. That evidence-based policy is an obvious, commonsense intervention. I commend the four city councils for their action to protect health and improve air quality, and I welcome it.

It is not the case that Scotland is unique in introducing this type of emission-based vehicle access restriction—far from it. The four Scottish cities join more than 320 towns and cities across Europe that have similar schemes, helping to make cities cleaner, healthier, safer and more attractive places to live, work and visit.

Critics of LEZs suggest that current air quality means that they are not needed. However, the detractors fail to acknowledge that recent air quality improvements are, in part, due to preparations for LEZ enforcement. Businesses, fleet operators and members of the public have not left it until the last minute. Instead, they have invested in cleaner vehicles in the years running up to enforcement starting.

The other key point that some fail to comprehend is that the legal air quality targets are the absolute minimum standards that are required—the floor, rather than the ceiling—of our missions for health and the environment. There is no safe level of air pollution, and any air pollution has detrimental impacts on health.

Hope Street in Glasgow has long been known to be the most polluted street in Scotland. However, with the first, bus-only phase of Glasgow’s LEZ having started in 2018 and with cleaner buses in place, that street now just meets the minimum air quality targets. With all vehicles in Glasgow city centre now being required to be LEZ compliant, we can expect even better results in the future.

Any suggestion that the LEZs have made air quality in the zones worse is nothing more than mischief making and selective cherry picking of data that is based on limited information. Full monitoring and performance reports, including on air quality in the cities, are a statutory requirement and will be published in due course.

This Government has provided extensive support to those households on low incomes and microbusinesses that have needed help to prepare for the LEZs. Since 2019, £13 million has been provided through our LEZ support fund to help low-income households and microbusinesses to prepare for the LEZs. A further £5 million will be available this year, including £2 million specifically for taxis. Through that scheme, more than 3,700 of the most polluting vehicles have been scrapped and alternative sustainable means of transport supported. For example, more than 2,000 bikes have been provided in place of scrapped vehicles. That, in turn, highlights the side benefits of our LEZ policy in helping to reduce car kilometres, tackle climate change and encourage healthier travel choices.

We are acutely aware that many disabled people rely on their cars or lifts from others and that some of those vehicles may not be LEZ compliant. We have therefore developed a system whereby blue badge holders can register for an exemption for not just their vehicle but any vehicle that they need to travel in. So far, more than 15,000 blue badge holders have registered with the scheme.

I am aware that concerns have been raised about the LEZs potentially having a negative effect on footfall in the cities. However, data from Glasgow earlier this year shows that footfall in the city centre was matching the pre-Covid levels at weekends and that evening footfall is higher than before, which indicates that the LEZ has had no negative effect. It is true that daytime footfall is slightly down, but that appears to be attributable in the main to changed working practices such as home working, which mean that cities are not as busy during office hours.

I formally place on the record my thanks to the four local authorities, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Transport Scotland officials for their focus and determination in delivering the LEZs. The work that has been done behind the scenes in undertaking the detailed assessment and design of the LEZs has been under way for a long time. In addition, the extensive marketing and awareness-raising campaigns that have been undertaken since 2019 have helped drivers and businesses around the country by giving them ample time to prepare for the LEZs.

We acknowledge that, although the move to LEZs will not affect the vast majority of vehicles on the road, it will mean that owners of high-polluting older vehicles will have to take action to avoid receiving penalty charge notices. Whether that will mean switching to a cleaner vehicle—petrol cars that are newer than 2006 are generally all compliant—or to more sustainable transport options, or varying their route to avoid the relatively small city centre areas, the effect is that only the owners of the most polluting vehicles need to take action.

The introduction of the low-emission zones is an essential measure to tackle the potentially life-changing impacts of harmful air pollution. I would like to think that all members see the low-emission zones for what they are—a reasonable and proportionate response to a very real public health issue that has been largely ignored for far too long.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move to the next item of business.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for providing advance sight of her statement. However, I have to say that there was very little point to it. It does not tell us anything that we did not already know. Apart from revealing an alliance between Liam Kerr, Colin Smyth and Mike Rumbles, it does not announce anything. It is just a defence of low-emission zones. For the avoidance of doubt, we have never been against low-emission zones in Scotland. Our view is that decisions on such zones are local decisions. Our concerns have always been about the implementation.

If we accept that the owners of older vehicles are often less well off, that gives rise to a couple of questions. What analysis has the Scottish Government done on how many older vehicles will be affected in the low-emission zones for those who live and work in the zones? How many taxis in Scotland are still non-compliant?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Graham Simpson has raised a number of issues. I am more than happy to take parliamentary time to promote good policies such as low-emission zones, so I am happy to be here to make the statement. I point out that the reason for the statement is that Liam Kerr did not understand where the responsibilities between national Government and local government lay and what flexibilities there were. That is why I took the opportunity to address those issues right at the beginning of my statement.

I agree that this is about local decisions. If Graham Simpson wants to talk about local implementation, that is probably not the basis for him to ask questions of me, as the national Cabinet Secretary for Transport. That is a matter for him to have meetings about with the relevant local authorities.

Graham Simpson’s substantive question was about how many vehicles are affected. Seventy-five to 80 per cent of cars that will be in the city centres are expected to be compliant. In relation to taxis, we know that, for example, there has been total support for Glasgow, which means that 1,100 taxis are now compliant in Glasgow. I can also provide the information that Glasgow City Council has provided exemptions for another 202 taxi vehicles post the end of June 2024.

I have tried to give Graham Simpson some additional information that he may not have, but I remind him that the reason for the statement is that Liam Kerr wanted to have clarity on local flexibility.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

First, I make it clear that Scottish Labour supports the view that local authorities should have the powers to be able to tackle poor air quality and air pollution where it exists. When it comes to low-emission zones, it is crucial that an authority understands the impact of introducing an LEZ and that it works with communities, local businesses and transport providers to properly assess the impact and to provide support to ensure the success of the scheme.

In Glasgow, black cab businesses could be lost, in part due to the lack of appropriate support. Will the cabinet secretary ensure that the Government undertakes a review of the implementation of the LEZs across Scotland so that any lessons that need to be learned are learned? Will she put in place options for any support that is required to ensure that the LEZs are successful?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Yes, I will. I reassure the member that I have had regular meetings with the council leads—the councillors for Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen, and his colleague Councillor Scott McArthur in Edinburgh. We are already learning lessons from each other, and I think that that is correct. It is a very appropriate question.

I should have pointed out that licensing in Glasgow has been slightly different. For example, in Dundee and Aberdeen, far more of the taxis were already compliant for different reasons, although Aberdeen has an exemption for a further year. We know that more than 450 taxis have already been retrofitted to Euro 6, with grants providing up to £10,000 of capital costs.

The question gives me the opportunity to highlight that, in 2024-25, a further £2 million will be made available to support taxi operators with retrofitting costs.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

We know that some vehicles pollute more than others or have done so in the past. Can the cabinet secretary provide any update regarding the funding that has been provided through the low-emission zone support fund to date to enable more of those vehicles and operators to comply with the low-emission zone requirements? How many households and businesses is that fund expected to have supported?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

A total of £13.1 million has been paid out to lower-income households and smaller businesses through the scheme between October 2019 and March 2024, which has seen more than 4,000 non-LEZ-compliant, high-polluting vehicles taken off our roads. Help to meet the LEZ standards has been provided to an estimated 2,500 lower-income households and—in answer to Mr Rowley’s point, too—to 1,600 small businesses. As I indicated, there is also a further £2 million this year for taxi operators.

Through our bus emission abatement retrofit, which has helped to improve our bus fleet, more than £24 million has been allocated to allow more than 1,100 midlife buses and coaches, operated by 59 different bus coach companies, to be cleaned up to the latest Euro 6 emission standard.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for clarifying the Aberdeen City Council leader’s misunderstandings on flexibility. On that point, crucially, the emissions data that the Aberdeen City Council used to justify imposing the Government’s 2017 LEZ appears to be years out of date, and existing emissions do not seem to come from vehicles anyway. Nevertheless, Aberdeen City Council has spent £1.5 million so far. Can the cabinet secretary tell us more about the performance reports on emissions reductions? Will those reports contain an assessment of whether such reductions outweigh the council’s spend, the negative impact on disabled, older and poorer people, and the devastating impact on Aberdeen’s local businesses?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I thank Liam Kerr for acknowledging that I have addressed his question on flexibility. To say that emissions from vehicles make no contribution is really overstating it, so I caution against saying that there are no emissions.

The emission zones have been operational for a number of years, allowing time for people to change their vehicles. Therefore, the data that is used would not necessarily be from the year of enforcement but could be from previous years. However, in our next meeting with the four council leads, we will address the point that was previously raised about how we monitor the process.

I also want to dispel the point about the impact, particularly on people with disabilities. I emphasise that blue badge holders can apply for exemptions not just for themselves but for a car that they are driving in, and a scheme has been established to ensure that that happens.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I welcome what the cabinet secretary has said in her statement about lung health. The cross-party group on lung health, which I am co-convener of, has heard evidence on how poor air quality can stunt the growth of children’s lungs, worsen existing lung conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma and even cause lung cancer. Will research and monitoring continue to be done on how low-emission zones are protecting people against poor lung health?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

That monitoring is very important. I am pleased that Gareth Brown, the chair of the healthy air Scotland coalition and a representative of Asthma and Lung UK Scotland, has made that point. With one in five Scots developing a lung condition such as asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease during their lifetime, air pollution can trigger life-threatening asthma attacks and flare-ups and, as we have heard, children are more susceptible. The public health aspects of the policy are very important. I commend the work that the University of Dundee has done and I would like to see more work being done on the monitoring that Emma Harper has referred to. I pay tribute to her and others in the Parliament for raising the issue of lung disease and the impacts that it could have on people’s daily lives.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

Can the cabinet secretary give an update on what financial support the Scottish Government has offered to councils and small businesses to upgrade their fleets, particularly given the costs of upgrading to electric vehicles? Many councils and businesses want to do that, but there have been challenges in the aftermath of Covid, which impacted many of our small businesses.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We are very conscious of fleet replacement, both in relation to this issue and more generally in relation to support for an electric fleet. We have already provided funding for councils and we are about to provide more funding for them for fleet replacement, although I am not sure what we can announce at this time. That is an important part of it. The member asked about support for councils; we have supported them on the promotion of the LEZs and their administration. It varies as to which councils have received the money, but they are in the process of receiving the support for the administration of low-emission zones.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Children are particularly vulnerable to air pollution, from when they are in the womb until they reach adulthood. Pollution can cause low birth weight, asthma and reduced lung function, among other things. With the European Environment Agency estimating that more than 1,200 deaths in people who are under 18 are caused by air pollution every year, does the cabinet secretary agree that air quality policies such as LEZs should protect the health of children and young people by explicitly taking into account the differences in their biology and exposure pathways?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

In recent weeks, the contribution from health experts who have helped to explain the difference that LEZs will have for young people has been quite striking. Young people are still developing, so the impacts on them are even more severe. The University of Aberdeen has done some interesting work to look at the cognitive development of babies and children and the impact that air pollution can have on that. Air pollution is firmly in the public health arena. I am pleased that, across the cities, and from different parties, we have support for the policy.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The Scottish Greens welcome the enforcement of Scotland’s low-emission zones. Revenue that is raised by the policy will have a transformational effect in Glasgow, where it will be used to support local, sustainable transport projects. Organisations such as the Cargo Bike Movement in Lothian, which I visited this week, are in desperate need of similar support. The Cargo Bike Movement not only uses cargo bikes to redistribute food to those who need it but loans and rents those bikes to the community, so that people can transport goods in a low-carbon way. What can the Scottish Government do to ensure that the revenue from the new LEZ schemes will be redistributed as quickly as possible to organisations that are doing great work to get people out of their cars and on to bikes?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I commend the work of the organisation that Lorna Slater has referred to. I emphasise that the LEZs are a public health measure and are not for revenue raising. She is correct in saying that any revenues that are raised are required to be spent on transport and improvement measures that are chosen by local authorities. However, we want to be in a situation in which the schemes do not raise revenue and in which fewer penalty charge notices are issued because we have made improvements in the number of people coming into LEZ enforcement areas. I am keen to ensure that we pursue the policy for public health reasons, rather than to raise revenue.

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

I am sure that the cabinet secretary will join me in commending the fantastic work that Dundee City Council has been undertaking to electrify its vehicle fleet and support the increase in the number of electric taxis and buses in the city. It is, of course, early days for the LEZs in Dundee, Aberdeen and Edinburgh, but is the cabinet secretary aware of any significant problems with compliance or early impacts on people travelling to and around Scotland’s city centres? Does the cabinet secretary share my concerns that the interests of the Tories, rather than being concerned about people’s health, appear to be entirely connected with the upcoming general election?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Joe FitzPatrick has made his point. As a minister in the pre-election period, I will not comment on the latter part of his question.

It is early days, but the feedback from local authorities and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is positive. We are not aware of any operational, camera or enforcement systems issues. The first penalty charge notices are expected to land on doormats by the end of this week.

I join Joe FitzPatrick in commending the work of Dundee City Council. It has been replacing its fleets and ensuring that, through licensing, its taxis are modernised—for lots of different reasons, not least for EV use and for people with disabilities. I am very interested in how Dundee has carried out that exercise. Each local authority has developed its own scheme and has engaged with local communities on its own terms, which is as it should be. We are confident that, if we can improve the air quality in our cities, we will improve not only the quality of public health but the quality of life for those who live, work and visit there.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The cabinet secretary referred to engagement with local communities, and she is absolutely right to point to the importance of allowing local flexibility. She will be aware that residents in Orkney and Shetland often arrive in Aberdeen by ferry, sometimes for hospital appointments at the Aberdeen royal infirmary. What would her expectation be of the level of consultation and awareness raising on how people from Orkney and Shetland arriving in Aberdeen might engage with or, indeed, avoid the low-emission zones?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am aware that, for some time, there has been pre-promotion by the northern isles ferry service, in particular, to ensure that people who have been using that service are being presented with information on what happens when people come into Aberdeen harbour. There is also signage around Aberdeen harbour to make sure that people are aware of where they can go.

The geography of the city centre LEZs are, on average, a square mile. It varies from city to city. In the end, between 1 and 2 per cent of the whole city environment has been affected by the measure. Of course, that is the part of the city that is most congested and where the air quality issues have historically been more problematic. We need to improve the air quality for public health reasons, as it is affecting those who live there and children in particular.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The ministerial team has given its full backing to the low-emission zone in Scotland’s capital, which might also reduce traffic volumes and tackle congestion across Edinburgh.

Will the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity give his backing to a project that is estimated to remove half a million cars during the central belt rush hour—a project that will be more beneficial to achieving our net zero goals than Edinburgh’s low-emission zone—and build a station in Winchburgh?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

As Cabinet Secretary for Transport, I will be answering the question. I think that Sue Webber has been a member long enough to know that it is the same minister who answers questions as presents the statement.

I am a great champion of Winchburgh in my capacity as a back-bench MSP, and I have been for many years. As I said in committee just yesterday, I was instrumental in bringing all the players together to make sure that we got further on than we would have been otherwise. I am delighted that my colleague Mr Fairlie will be taking on that issue.

Sue Webber makes an important point. If we are to tackle congestion in cities—not just in the city centre but over wider areas—it is the people of East Lothian, Midlothian and West Lothian who have to be supported in relation to how they travel into cities. On that point, I agree with her.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I wonder whether the cabinet secretary agrees with Dr Richard Dixon when he says, in today’s Scotsman , that the successful introduction of low-emission zones in Scotland has been

“Despite a certain amount of nervousness and political parties playing games”,

which shows that

“politicians can be bolder when introducing environmental measures.”

He goes on to say that a survey found that

“3 times as many people in Scotland support LEZs as oppose them.”

Therefore, does the cabinet secretary agree that the public has more appetite for well-designed environmental measures?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I do, indeed, and I recognise the recent opinion polls that show that vast majority of support from the public for such measures.

I regret any party political positioning around that, but I also reiterate that our most successful policies are those on which we all come together across the parties. That is the leadership that the people of Scotland want.

Of course, we are not alone, because 320 towns and cities across Europe—an increase of 40 per cent since 2019—have introduced such vehicle access restriction schemes. Those countries include Germany, Italy, Denmark, the Czech Republic, France and Portugal, and England has clear air zones in Bath, Birmingham, Bradford, Bristol, Portsmouth, Sheffield and Tyneside.

The public are looking to us to collectively push forward pro-public health and pro-environmental policies, and to do so in a way that takes everyone with us.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Not all disabled people have blue badges, and often the only accessible public transport that is available to them is taxis, which many rely on to get to work or appointments or to see family and friends.

In Glasgow, despite the extension that the cabinet secretary has mentioned, 246 taxi drivers still need help to comply, because they have not been able to access the funds or mechanics to do what is needed. The result is that one in five drivers will hand back their licence, which will impact many people in the region, including, disproportionately, disabled people.

I support the aspirations of a low-emission zone, but the Scottish Government and Glasgow City Council have to address that issue. What more can the cabinet secretary do to help the remaining 246 taxi drivers to stay in work? If she will not take further action on that, will she set out how she expects disabled people to get around Glasgow with fewer taxis available to take them?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Pam Duncan-Glancy has consistently raised that issue with me. The purpose of the statement is to recognise the flexibility that each local authority has to make changes, which she acknowledges. As we have reflected, Glasgow City Council has exempted another 202 taxis, which brings the total to 1,100 that are available for use. That is my understanding, and I will correct the record if I am wrong about that total.

As Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and my local authority have done, Glasgow has to recognise that all black cabs must have disability access. There is a variability between local authorities in the licensing that is required so that people with disabilities can use taxis when they need to. That needs to be the focus, rather than the LEZs.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the ministerial statement. There will be a short pause before we move on to the next item of business, to allow front-bench teams to change positions.

Road Infrastructure

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-13480, in the name of Graham Simpson, on improving Scotland’s roads. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons now or as soon as possible, and I advise members that we have no time in hand this afternoon.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Presiding Officer, I do not know what you think, but I think that one of the basic infrastructure requirements of any country is to make it easy to get around. It is kind of vital to people and it is certainly vital to the economy. For the country to function, we need to get a few basics right, and chief among those requirements is decent roads. We do not necessarily need more roads; we just need better ones.

World leaders are not queuing up to get advice on that from the Scottish Government—and nor are leaders from anywhere else in Britain—because Scotland is ahead of the game, but only in the number of potholes that we have. Earlier this year, researchers who analysed reports of potholes in 69 cities across Britain, which were registered via FixMyStreet.com, found that Glasgow was the worst, followed by Edinburgh. I see that China has landed a craft on the crater-filled dark side of the moon. It could have saved itself the bother and just come to Glasgow, or to Caithness, where it has been reported that people are leaving because of the state of the roads. Scotland’s roads are so bad that we could almost think that it is deliberate. It is as if we are living in some dystopian experiment led by a faceless Green committee that sits around trying to think of ways to stop us driving.

I do not blame the councils—not even anti-car Edinburgh would actually want its roads to be as bad they are. It comes down to the decline in funding that our councils have had under the Scottish National Party, and it is time that we stopped that.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

The member quite rightly mentioned Edinburgh and our problem with potholes, but is he aware that, in the recent budget decisions, the SNP proposal to cut the budget by around £5 million was defeated by the rest of the council? At least the situation will not get even worse.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Common sense from Edinburgh for a change.

When it comes to moving goods and people, it is our trunk road network that does the heavy lifting, and it is found wanting. From the A75 and the A77 to the A1, the A9, full dualling of which by 2025 was promised in 2011, and the A96, whose dualling was promised in 2007—I could even throw in the M8, not to mention the Rest and Be Thankful—we have main roads that are in serious need of upgrading, which are all years behind where they should be under the SNP.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

As the member said, the SNP has broken a 17-year-old promise to dual the A96 from Inverness to Aberdeen. A delaying-tactic report is now a year and a half late and has cost £5 million so far. John Swinney made comments in Elgin at the weekend that suggest that it will be further delayed. Does the member think that the SNP has shamefully taken the people of the north-east for fools and that it needs to stop the excuses and get on with dualling the A96?

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Yes.

There are tragic consequences of failing to invest. Between 2020 and 2023, there were 144 deaths on Scotland’s major trunk roads that go outside the central belt, and 104 of those were on sections that were not dualled. Failing to invest can also hit people in the pocket. A constituent of mine found that out when his car suffered hundreds of pounds of damage when he was driving along the M8 at night. Amey, whose job it is to maintain that road, told him:

“It is not the duty of an Operating Company to make all roads under their control completely safe ... Our duty is to maintain roads in a condition which is safe for road users who are themselves exercising reasonable care.”

In other words, Amey was saying, “If you don’t look out for potholes and you hit one, it’s your own fault.” It is no wonder that driving instructors in Scotland are now teaching their students how to avoid them: just do not go out.

The cabinet secretary might well say that the debate is just us trying to score points ahead of a general election—or she might not, now that I have headed her off at the pass. She would be wrong, because we have been making those points for years and we are no nearer to seeing roads such as the A9 completed. Reading the Government’s amendment today, one would think that everything is just fine, the Government is cracking on with things and there is just a temporary pause because of—wait for it—Westminster.

I think that we should finish with a game. It is called “Guess who said this”, and all the questions are about the A9. The first one is easy:

“I am sorry that we will not have dualled the A9 by 2025 ... I want to be clear, though, that I do not accept that we failed to meet that target because we just did not bother and we were not trying to meet it. The 2025 target was set for the right reasons and we were committed to it.”—[Official Report, Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, 29 May 2024; c 7.]

There are no prizes for guessing that that was Nicola Sturgeon last week.

Then there is this one:

“the A9 is the backbone of Scotland. It must be safe, reliable and resilient, and that is what the Government will deliver.”—[Official Report, 20 December 2023; c 23.]

While members are all being impressed by the stand-up comedy abilities of that speaker, I can tell them it was none other than Màiri McAllan.

Finally, Presiding Officer,

“This is not an easy project. The A9 dualling is one of the most sophisticated pieces of infrastructure we have ever undertaken … Things are getting done. We need to move on from this. I get sick and tired of listening to the Tories constantly bringing this up in parliament as if they own the issue. It’s us, that is the first government who has ever pledged to dual the A9 in its entirety.”

Control yourselves now. Who said that? Any guesses? No? The answer is witty Pete Wishart in his stirring address to the SNP conference last year.

That is a series of SNP figures with delusional outlooks. The SNP has had 17 years to deliver. It has not delivered. It will never deliver. The SNP needs to go.

I move,

That the Parliament acknowledges the importance of a well-maintained road network to Scotland’s economy; believes that Scottish National Party administrations have repeatedly broken promises on major road upgrades and that their underfunding of Scottish local authorities has led to a deterioration in the condition of local roads, and calls upon the Scottish Government to fairly fund Scottish local authorities and make road infrastructure a key priority.