Scottish Parliament, 13 June 2024

364 contributions from 67 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good afternoon—or, actually, good morning. [Laughter.] The first item of business is general questions.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government when it will end the reported practice of children and young people being admitted to adult services for treatment, rather than a national health service specialist child and adolescent mental health ward. (S6O-03573)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We expect children and young people who require in-patient mental health care to be looked after in age-appropriate facilities. We have three regional young person units providing specialist support to young people from across Scotland, as well as a national child psychiatric in-patient unit.

Very occasionally a young person will be admitted to an adult ward—for example, where they require admission to an intensive psychiatric care unit and cannot be safely cared for in an open adolescent unit. Admission will be for the shortest possible time and under strict conditions, including supervision from child and adolescent mental health service clinicians and following the guidance on admission to adult mental health wards for under-18s.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I recently held a round-table meeting in the Parliament, when I welcomed Jane and Dave Macdonnell, who told MSPs about the experience of their son, Harris. I thank the MSPs who attended that meeting, at which the Macdonnells bravely read out Harris’s essay, “Escape”, which captured his time being held in an adult service.

Harris said:

“When I became unwell, I was admitted to Huntlyburn Adult Psychiatric Unit, because there were no beds in Scotland available in any Young Person’s Unit. No other young person should have to go through the experience I had.

It was the wrong place for someone who was already mixed up, frightened and unsure of who they were. The environment heightened my anxiety. After treatment for my injuries I was cared for in the Young Person’s Unit in Edinburgh for 2 months and I began my recovery.”

Harris Macdonnell tragically took his own life in 2020.

I welcome the meeting that I recently managed to secure with Maree Todd. The family have had meetings with her, too. I also welcome the news of the fatal accident inquiry that is now to take place regarding Harris’s case.

However, the scandal of children and young people still being admitted to adult services has to end. It has gone on for too long. Will the Scottish Government now act and agree to introduce a ban on children and young people being admitted to adult services?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank Miles Briggs for his work in representing the Macdonnell family, to whom I pass my sincere condolences, and I pay tribute to the incredible work that they are doing through the Harris Trust, in Harris’s memory. I also pay tribute to Miles Briggs for the work that he has done, including the meeting that he held with my colleague Maree Todd.

Of course, such circumstances are horrendous for any family to deal with, and we will keep working to ensure that they are avoided. To enhance future provision, we are providing funding to boards to develop regional adolescent intensive psychiatric care units. We currently have 54 CAMHS in-patient beds across Scotland for children and adolescents, in the Dudhope young people’s unit, the Melville unit and Skye house. Those units admit children and young people from their health board regions, with the flexibility to admit from other regions if the unit closest to a child or young person is full.

I will, of course, take on board the ask that Miles Briggs has raised, but I return to the point that I made in my opening reply, which was that, in some circumstances—I hope that they are rare circumstances—it is necessary to ensure safe delivery of care for children and young people. Sometimes they need to be seen in adult services, but that must be done following the guidance that I mentioned, while ensuring that it is avoided, wherever possible.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider increasing funding for empty homes officers, in light of the First Minister’s reported statement that empty homes are key to tackling the housing emergency. (S6O-03574)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Since 2010, we have invested over £800,000 to embed empty homes officers within councils through funding for the Scottish Empty Homes Partnership. Ariane Burgess rightly highlights the effectiveness of our approach, as endorsed by the independent audit last year, with 9,000 homes being brought back into use.

Although it is for councils to determine how to deploy their resources to best effect, the audit recognised the critical role that officers play in unlocking barriers, particularly with private owners. They are an essential component of the partnership’s co-produced strategic empty homes framework approach to maximising the impact across local authority housing services. We recently updated guidance to councils about utilising the ring-fenced revenue that they derive from the council tax on second and empty homes to fund more officers.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

In Tiree, a constituent was recently on the brink of leaving the island, where her family work and volunteer, because they could not find a home to rent. Thirty-six per cent of homes in Tiree do not meet local needs because they are holiday lets or empty homes. Argyll and Bute Council and Tiree Community Development Trust are working hard with the resources that they have to address that, but many people across the Highlands and Islands still cannot find or afford a decent home in the community in which they want to live. What more is the Scottish Government doing to get empty properties back into use as homes for people who need them?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I met housing associations and development trusts in Argyll and Bute with the local member about a month ago to discuss that particular point. It is up to the local authority how it uses its funds on empty homes officers. However, there is a real role for development trusts, as well. I would be happy to meet Ariane Burgess to discuss that further, because their role is essential.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Last month, the Scottish Government declared a housing emergency, with tens of thousands of people struggling to find suitable accommodation. However, the latest Scottish Government figures show that the number of long-term-empty properties has increased by 4 per cent, to more than 46,000, in a year. The Scottish Conservatives, as well as charities including Crisis, have called for the creation of a fund that would allow councils to convert such properties into affordable housing. Does the Scottish Government intend to introduce such a fund?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I mentioned our investment. We have invested £3.7 million in the Scottish Empty Homes Partnership since 2010, and we have brought back 9,000 homes since 2010. I know that the Scottish Tories previously announced that they wanted to spend £255 million to bring back 7,400 homes. Our approach demonstrates that it is the best way to proceed.

I meet local authorities and discuss those particular points. We are always encouraging local authorities to take on more empty homes partnerships, but it is up to them. Only this morning, I met the City of Edinburgh Council—which is taking on more empty homes partnerships—to discuss that point. Again, I am happy to discuss the issue with Ariane Burgess.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with NHS Lothian and NHS Borders regarding financial stability in the 2024-25 financial year. (S6O-03575)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Despite our significant investment in 2024-25, with an increase of over half a billion pounds, which presents a real-terms uplift to front-line boards, the system remains under extreme pressure as a result of the on-going impacts of Covid, Brexit, inflation and United Kingdom Government spending decisions.

The Scottish Government’s financial delivery unit works closely with all boards, including NHS Lothian and NHS Borders, as part of the financial planning process. The Scottish Government has met NHS Lothian and NHS Borders on multiple occasions to develop and implement 2024-25 financial plans this year. Quarter 1 reviews will be held in the coming months to assess their current financial performance.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Mr Gray is aware that both health boards face a bleak financial future as a result of the Scottish National Party’s misplaced financial priorities. The decisions that they are now taking are causing real concerns to national health service staff and worried patients. In the Scottish Borders, 92 essential community hospital beds, including in Kelso, Hawick, Duns and Peebles, are at risk. In East Lothian, the Edington and Belhaven hospitals, the Abbey residential care home and Blossom house residential care home have been summarily closed without any consultation. To top it all, general practitioners in East Lothian face massive increases in facilities management fees.

Despite the Scottish Government being the root cause of those problems, it is passing the buck. Michael Taylor of the primary care directorate recently wrote to me to say that, although the Scottish Government had a national approach to the issue of facilities management fees, it was for boards to agree

“any fair and equitable approach”.

Is it not time for the Scottish Government to step in, properly fund boards, and halt those damaging charges and closures?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

There is, of course, a hint of irony in Craig Hoy’s question about the financial stability of our health boards, because our decisions to have a more progressive form of taxation, which means that we have raised £1.5 billion more for public services here in Scotland, were opposed by the Scottish Conservatives.

The allocation to the national health service of the Barnett consequentials that came from the spring budget was also opposed by the Scottish Conservatives. They wanted us to divert that money to business tax relief and are well entitled to do so, but if they had had their way, it would have led to an even worse situation for our health boards because of the financial challenges that they face.

Regarding the situation that is faced by general practices, I, of course, greatly value the work that they do, but it is for boards to come forward and resolve the situation. We invested more than £1.2 billion in general medical services in 2023-24 and are fully committed to increasing the number of GPs in Scotland to ensure that more people get the right care in the right place at the right time. We have a record number of GPs in training and have a head count that includes 271 more GPs in Scotland as a result of our actions. We will keep supporting their work in primary care, which is the bedrock of our health service.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I am going to call Sarah Boyack for a brief supplementary question. Before I do so, I remind all members that the length of questions and responses in this session means that it will be impossible for me to get in all members who wish to contribute.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

With 84 per cent of Scotland’s future population growth expected to be in the Lothians, NHS Lothian is in desperate need of investment, but our health board is already having to make a 6 per cent saving by cutting vital services, including diabetes technology. Yesterday, in a meeting with the cabinet secretary, the campaign group KEEP—keep Edinburgh eye pavilion—reinforced the urgent need for investment in a new eye pavilion. What will the Scottish Government do now to ensure that our health board has the funding to cope with substantial increases in our population now and in the future?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

As I outlined to Craig Hoy, we have passed on a real-terms increase to our front-line boards so that they can respond to the challenges that they face following Covid, Brexit, inflation and the UK cost of living crisis. I recognise that there are challenges despite the 3 per cent real-terms increase, which we have delivered in the face of a falling block grant from Westminster. We have increased the budget for Lothian by £82.2 million this year, but I recognise the challenges that persist.

Sarah Boyack asked about the eye pavilion, but we are in an even more acute situation with capital because of the £1.3 billion cut by the UK Government to our capital budget. It is incumbent on colleagues across the chamber to ensure that they lobby the UK Government—of whichever colour comes next—to invest properly in the health service, rather than continuing the austerity that is currently on offer from both parties.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Communication Workers Union’s call for housing standards to be updated to ensure that letterboxes are positioned at a suitably accessible height. (S6O-03576)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The Scottish Government is aware of the Communication Workers Union’s long-standing campaign highlighting the health and safety issues that low-level letterboxes present to its members. I recognise the benefits that addressing the issue would have for its members and, more generally, for the accessibility and safety of homes.

Officials are engaging with the CWU and are assessing the options for amendment to building standards guidance, subject to further engagement with industry stakeholders. That amendment would provide more explicit guidance about the positioning of the letterboxes provided in new dwellings.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I have been working with the CWU’s national health and safety officer for more than a year on the issue of low-level letterboxes and have also been in dialogue with Scottish Government officials. I am told that there are no objections to banning low-level letterboxes in future developments or in door replacements, because that would benefit postal workers by reducing the risk of injury. Will the minister outline the steps that the Scottish Government has taken to implement that policy?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I am committed to reviewing the building standards guidance regarding low-level letterboxes and am working with stakeholders, prior to any change to building standards guidance, to confirm that there will be no unintended consequences. Officials will continue engaging with the CWU and with wider industry stakeholders to assess the options for amending building standards guidance. I reassure the member that updates to the guidance will follow that process as soon as is possible.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what steps it is taking to increase the number of GPs. (S6O-03577)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Let me be clear: GPs are highly valued in our national health service, and I thank them for their tireless work supporting patients in our communities.

I remain fully committed to increasing the number of GPs in Scotland by 800, by 2027. The GP head count has increased by 271 since 2017 and it is consistently more than 5,000. Training new GPs is key and we have expanded GP specialty training, adding 35 places this academic year and 35 places next year. There are currently more than 1,200 trainee GPs in Scotland, which is a record, and we have invested more than £1 million into a range of recruitment and retention initiatives.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Will the cabinet secretary advise members how GP numbers in Scotland compare with those in other parts of the United Kingdom? Given that concerns have been raised by constituents about the time that it takes to obtain an appointment, how much have the numbers of patients presenting at GP surgeries risen since the pandemic? What work is being undertaken with surgeries to improve the efficiency of their appointment systems?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Kenneth Gibson is correct that we have a far higher number of GPs per head of population in Scotland than is present in England and Wales, but we are not complacent about that situation. That is why we are investing in the GP training programmes, as well as the recruitment and retention work that I described. We are also ensuring that there is equity of access between urban and rural areas, which is why the Scottish graduate entry medicine programme is so important, as well as the rural fellowship programme.

We know that 90 per cent of all health service interactions are in primary care, and that the complexity of the needs of patients who are arriving at GP practices has increased, post pandemic. That means that the length of time for which GPs need to see their patients has increased, putting great pressure on those services, which is why we continue to invest in multidisciplinary teams to provide the capacity and support that primary care practitioners need.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its work to tackle poverty, in the light of recent analysis by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation showing that 86 per cent of low-income households receiving universal credit were going without the essentials and that nearly 1 million people in the United Kingdom are “only £10 a week away from poverty”. (S6O-03578)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Despite facing the most challenging budget settlement since devolution, we are committing more than £3 billion this year to policies that tackle poverty and protect people, as far as possible, during the on-going cost of living crisis. That includes investment in our game-changing Scottish child payment and into early learning and childcare, as well as providing free bus travel for more than 2 million people.

Our action is making a difference, with modelling estimating that our policies will keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty this year. Of course, we could go so much further, if Westminster matched Scotland’s ambition, with policies towards eradicating child poverty such as introducing an essentials guarantee and abolishing the two-child limit.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

With austerity, Brexit and the cost of living crisis, those figures are a shocking indictment of 14 years of Tory rule. The Resolution Foundation warns that the Tory’s manifesto plans would slash welfare by another £12 billion. Will the cabinet secretary outline what she will discuss with her UK Government counterpart after the election, given that the key powers are reserved to Westminster? Does she agree that it would be better if the Scottish Government could invest more in its own anti-poverty policies, rather than having to mitigate the cuts from cruel Westminster policies such as the bedroom tax?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Collette Stevenson is right to point out that there is money that the Scottish Government has to invest in our people because we have to mitigate the effect of welfare cuts. Currently, we invest £134 million to mitigate the effects of the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. It certainly appears that, regardless of who wins the next UK election and who is in number 10, those mitigations will have to remain in place, because no changes will be made. We would like to go further on the issue, but it is difficult to see how we can do that when, despite the promises that have been made, no new funding for anti-poverty measures is coming from either party.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I will take question 7, if members are brief.

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

To ask the Scottish Government when it last engaged with Aberdeen City Council in relation to reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. (S6O-03579)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Scottish Government officials met Aberdeen City Council officers on 4 June to discuss the council’s progress on its planned rehoming programme and its options appraisal for the remediation of properties in which RAAC has been identified in poor condition. I have committed to continuing to engage with council leaders on the issue and plan to meet them over the coming weeks as they continue to make progress on the issue.

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

The minister is aware of the significant wellbeing toll that the RAAC situation in my constituency is taking on around 350 households, and I commend council officers for their commitment in supporting tenants as they are rehoused. Similarly, home owners are deeply concerned about the viability of their properties. Many have substantial mortgages and have worked hard to enhance their homes.

The costs that are associated with resolving the matter will be significant. Notwithstanding that the final option is still being assessed, what financial flexibility exists for the Scottish Government and local authorities to work together to identify the most pragmatic possible financial solution?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

To date, Aberdeen City Council’s only specific request for flexibility has been around the temporary use of Ukraine longer-term resettlement fund homes to assist in its planned rehoming project. The Scottish Government worked with the council to accommodate that request. We will be happy to give due consideration to any detailed proposals that come forward, and I am sure that members across the chamber will join me in calling on an incoming United Kingdom Government to deliver a dedicated RAAC fund.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes general question time. Before we move to First Minister’s question time, I invite members to join me in welcoming to the gallery Nathalie Roy MNA, president of the National Assembly of Quebec. [ Applause .]

First Minister’s Question Time

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I begin by wishing Scotland’s men’s team the very best of luck as they open the Euro 2024 tournament tomorrow night against Germany. The tartan army has travelled in huge numbers to support Steve Clarke and the team, and I know that we will all be cheering them on to success. [ Applause .]

This week, during the election debate in Glasgow, Anna McLintock asked John Swinney what he would do to improve Scotland’s health service. She spoke about her 93-year-old mother, who needed urgent care but had to wait six hours for an ambulance to arrive and then another two hours outside the hospital before she was admitted. John Swinney did not have answers for Anna on Tuesday, so what does he say to her now, and to so many other people across Scotland who have found themselves in the same situation?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Before I address the substantive question that Douglas Ross has put to me, I, too, put on record my good wishes to Scotland’s men’s team, which will play hosts Germany in the opening match of Euro 2024. If I can say so to the Parliament, it is great to see Scotland back in Europe, where we rightly belong.

As First Minister, I wish Steve Clarke’s team the best of luck, and I wish the huge numbers of Scotland supporters who are making the journey a safe and memorable trip. I know that the tartan army will be an absolute credit to Scotland, and I know that the team will be a credit to Scotland, because it has inspired so many of us by its success in getting to Euro 2024. I look forward very much to being present to encourage the Scotland team on Friday evening, to ensure their success on Friday night.

Mr Ross has raised a significant issue. In the television debate the other evening, I apologised to Anna McLintock for the experience that her mother had had.

One of the challenges that we face is the volume of demand for health service utilisation in Scotland. There is also a challenge because of the level of delayed discharges from hospitals, which means that our hospitals are operating at very high levels of occupancy.

What we are doing about that is to try to work with local authorities to tackle the issue of delayed discharge. We have had extensive discussions. I, personally, have had discussions with the leadership of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has followed that up to work to reduce delayed discharges and congestion in our hospitals.

In addition, we are investing in our health service to the extent that we now have record levels of staffing to ensure that we can meet the needs and demands of the population in Scotland.

Although I acknowledge that not everybody is getting the treatment that they require as quickly as they require it, a very focused effort is being undertaken within the Government and our health boards to make sure that that can be delivered in all localities in Scotland.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister has apologised again to Anna McLintock, but many more people like her are concerned about the safety and wellbeing of their parents and grandparents. Anna asked the First Minister and other party leaders, “Is our NHS broken?” That is the concern of people up and down Scotland, who cannot get a general practitioner or dentist appointment; who are waiting too long for ambulances or to get into accident and emergency departments; and who need urgent care but cannot get it when they need it. All that those people seem to get from John Swinney and the Scottish National Party are excuses. Do they not deserve to hear the solutions?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have set out the solutions in my earlier answer to Mr Ross. The Government is very focused on ensuring that the national health service meets the needs of individuals. We all want the NHS to be able to deliver what people require when they require it.

The Government has taken the hard decisions to increase the resources that are available to the NHS. If we had, for example, just passed on the consequentials to the health service that were allocated through United Kingdom funding formulas, we would have passed on a lower amount of money than we have actually invested in the national health service. This Government has taken hard decisions about increasing tax on higher earners so that we can allocate more resources to the national health service.

I accept that, even having undertaken that allocation of increased resources, there remain significant strains on the national health service. The point that I made on Tuesday evening—in the discussion in which Mr Ross and I were involved—is that we cannot have, as an outcome of this election, a continuation of the Conservative Government’s austerity, because that would be disastrous for the national health service.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The national health service in Scotland has been under the remit of the SNP and John Swinney for 17 years. Another audience member said to Mr Swinney on Tuesday that he should not put the blame elsewhere but should take responsibility. Again, we are getting the same from John Swinney—he is taking no responsibility for Scotland’s NHS. He said that the NHS should meet the needs of individuals, but it is not doing so. It is clear to all of us that it is not meeting the needs of individuals.

Elderly people are routinely left waiting for care in our national health service for far longer than they should be. We have a response to a freedom of information request that shows just how stark the situation is. Patients who are aged over 100 are some of the most vulnerable in our communities. In just over a year, hundreds of them have been made to wait beyond the target treatment time in A and E departments. In more than 100 cases, people aged over 100 have been waiting more than 12 hours for emergency treatment. People who are over 100 are waiting for more than half a day to get emergency treatment in Scotland’s NHS. Those are only the figures for people aged over 100—many more elderly people are waiting in agony, too. John Swinney must surely agree that that is appalling and unacceptable. What is he going to do to fix it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I always indicate to Parliament when I am responding to questions, I take responsibility for the actions of my Government and the public services delivered on its behalf—that is my duty as First Minister on all occasions.

I suspect that the situation that Mr Ross recounted is addressed by the fact that our hospitals are operating at such a level of congestion that individuals are not able to be transferred from accident and emergency into wider hospital care for the simple reason that those hospitals are congested because of delayed discharge. That is the explanation of the problem.

The solution to the problem is, as I said in my first answer, to work with local authorities to expand the provision of social care in the community to ensure that we address the delayed discharge issue.

Ultimately, it comes back to the resources that are available to the national health service. I have set out that this Government has taken responsibility for that, because we have been prepared to take the hard decision to increase tax and ensure that more resources have been allocated to the national health service.

Mr Ross would be in a stronger position if he had not argued for me to follow the budget of Liz Truss. That was what Douglas Ross wanted me to do. He wanted me to follow—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

He wanted me to follow the tax-cutting agenda of Liz Truss. If I had done that, it would have been catastrophic for the country and the national health service, and I am really glad that I did not do it.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I would quite like John Swinney to focus on Scotland’s NHS and our elderly patients, who are waiting far too long to get the treatment that they deserve. He mentions delayed discharge. The cabinet secretary to his left—Shona Robison—promised to eradicate it seven years ago. Seven years ago, the SNP was going to get rid of delayed discharge altogether, but it is still having a huge impact on our NHS now.

Our FOI query only shows the problems in A and E departments and in ambulance waiting times. However, as we have raised with the SNP many times, there is a crisis at every single level of Scotland’s NHS. The number of GP appointments has fallen by 146,000 in the past three years. Over the past 10 years, the number of GP practices has reduced in every single health board across the country. In rural areas, they are shutting at twice the rate of those in urban areas. People across Scotland do not have access to the healthcare that they need and deserve, and that has to change.

We already know what will be line 1 of the SNP’s manifesto. How far down John Swinney’s list of priorities will Scotland’s NHS be?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The NHS is at the top of my list of priorities—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is why Scotland has an accident and emergency system that is the best performing in the United Kingdom and has been so for the past nine years—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is why the NHS is at the top of my list of priorities. On general practitioners, we have more GPs per head of population in Scotland than any other part of the United Kingdom, which are able to provide care to people in various parts of our country.

On priorities, I say to Douglas Ross that we can tell how Governments act by the resources that they allocate. This Government has taken the tough decision to increase tax on higher earners so that we can invest more in the NHS than was proposed by the Conservative Government in the consequentials. That tells us that the Scottish Government is giving the necessary priority to the national health service.

Mr Ross asked me about the question of independence, and I will answer his question very directly. Scotland would be in a stronger position to take greater decisions about investment in the NHS if we had the full powers of independence to use the resources of our country to create the best future for our country. I am proud to represent that position.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I join others in wishing manager Steve Clarke, captain Andy Robertson, vice-captain John McGinn and the entire Scotland men’s team all the very best for the Euros. I also wish the tartan army a safe and enjoyable visit to Germany.

Before I was elected, I worked in our national health service as a dentist. Dentistry is just one part of our NHS that is currently in crisis. Earlier this week, I visited a practice in Fife. Much to the frustration of the staff there, the practice cannot take any more NHS patients. In fact, four out of five practices across the country are not accepting new NHS patients, and more and more people are being forced to go private and pay.

The issue does not exist just in dentistry; it is all across our health service, and the problem is growing. The number of people who are being forced to pay for their own care has gone up 86 per cent since 2019 and is at the highest level ever. Labour created our NHS to be free at the point of need. Why does that principle not apply under the Scottish National Party?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise the challenges that exist in dental practice, but I point out that Scotland has 57 dentists per 100,000 of the population, compared with 42 per 100,000 in England and 46 per 100,000 in Wales. The investment that the Government has made in the national health service, and particularly in dentistry, has been an important contribution to establishing and achieving that position. That would not have happened had the Government not given that area priority since we came to office in 2007.

The Government has also undertaken a significant intervention through the introduction of a root-and-branch reform of the NHS dental payment system in November last year. We are in the early days of the implementation of that reform package.

Through the combination of the investment in the workforce and the investment in that reform package, the Government is supporting dentistry in Scotland to achieve the necessary delivery of service to people around the country.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I note that the First Minister did not respond to the fact that there is an 86 per cent increase in people having to go for self-payment because of a lack of access to our NHS. Also, the stats that John Swinney quoted will be zero comfort to people who cannot access NHS dentistry and are being forced to go private. I think that he needs to get his head out of the sand.

Labour founded our NHS to be free at the point of need and open to everyone, regardless of the ability to pay. Under the SNP, people again and again are forced to pay because they cannot get treatment in time. Last year, more than 1,500 people in Scotland were forced to pay for knee replacements, at a cost of nearly £16,000 each. There were 8,000 private operations for cataracts, at more than £2,800 each, and almost 3,000 hip replacements, at a cost of more than £14,000 each. In the middle of a cost of living crisis, when mortgages, energy bills and food prices have all gone up, how much have people had to dig into their own savings or borrow from friends and family in order to pay for their own treatment?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I regret the fact that people have felt the need to take recourse to private treatment. I have made it clear in my answers over several weeks that, particularly as a consequence of the increase in case loads because of the cancellation of procedures during the Covid pandemic, the presentation of demand on the national health service has increased. We are working to reduce waiting times and waiting lists to ensure that people get treatment at an earlier time than is the case just now.

I have to say to Anas Sarwar that he is on very thin ground when he challenges me on the question of private involvement in the national health service. I remind him of the comments of Labour’s shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, who said that a United Kingdom Labour Government would

“hold the door wide open”

for the private sector in the national health service. He also said:

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

What we have here is a classic example of what Anas Sarwar gets up to in public debate. He comes here and says one thing in Scotland, and in England his bosses are doing a completely different thing, which will have an effect on our budget here in Scotland. Anas Sarwar has already been caught out on that this week. It is not good enough for him to say one thing in Scotland and be contradicted by his bosses in London.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

That is, frankly, an embarrassing response to the fact that 3,000 people in Scotland—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

—have had to pay £14,000 for a hip replacement. Mr Swinney wants to do quotes, so I will quote two simple sentences from the UK Labour manifesto, which was published today, as they are a direct response:

“We have saved the NHS before, and the next Labour Government will do so again. With Labour, it will always be publicly owned and publicly funded.”

There will not be more people going private, as under the SNP. I will quote another sentence:

“There will be no return to austerity”,

so stop the scaremongering, stop the misinformation and be truthful with the people across Scotland—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members!

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I asked John Swinney how much people have had to find from their savings or to borrow from friends in order to pay for private treatment, and John Swinney very deliberately failed to answer the question. Let me tell him. Just for hip, knee and cataract surgeries in Scotland last year, people had to pay more than £83 million. That is what families had to find in the middle of a cost of living crisis, because of SNP incompetence. The SNP’s mismanagement of our NHS is so bad that it is those who are in pain, sick and injured who are forced to literally pay the price.

Perhaps most horrifyingly of all, there are people who are forced to go private and pay for their cancer treatment. To all the hecklers at the back, I say that that is the reality under the SNP Government. Cancer, Scotland’s biggest killer, is something that touches us all—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I must have a question, Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Every second that is wasted in the fight against cancer decreases the chances of survival—[ Interruption .]

Heckling cancer patients who must pay private fees—is that the height of the SNP’s ambition?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Sarwar, I would be grateful if you could please put a question to the First Minister.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I am coming right now to the question, Presiding Officer.

Last year, more than 1,000 rounds—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Sarwar, I will allow one further opportunity—

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

This is my question.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I certainly hope that it is.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Last year, more than 1,000 rounds of chemotherapy were paid for privately. Why does the First Minister believe that people in Scotland should have to pay for their life-saving cancer treatment—1,000 rounds—because of his party’s failure and incompetence?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not want anybody to have to pay for cancer treatment, but I have to face up to the reality of the challenges that our national health service faces.

Let me just give Mr Sarwar a statistic. The rate of people self-funding for private healthcare in England is 66 per cent higher than it is in Scotland—[ Interruption .] Oh, Jackie Baillie says, “But it is the Tories.” Well, we will give Labour-run Wales as a comparison: the rate is 13 per cent higher in Labour-run Wales than it is in SNP-run Scotland, so I say to Jackie Baillie that it is perhaps not a good idea to heckle me when I am in mid-flow.

What that all comes down to is the financial envelope that is available for the national health service. The Government is taking the hard decisions to increase tax in order to improve the amount of money that is invested in the national health service.

There was a day when the Labour Party supported us on that, but now it has deserted the pitch and run away. On orders from London, the Labour Party in Scotland is now voting against higher taxes on higher earners, because its bosses in London have told it to do exactly that. That will undermine the investment in our national health service, which is why Anas Sarwar has not a scrap of credibility when he tells me that there will be “no return to austerity” under a Labour Government. A Labour Government will have to make £20 billion-worth of spending cuts to pick up where the Tories have left off, so it will be continued austerity from Labour, and Scotland should vote against it.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Before I move to the next question, I point out that the length of time that we have taken to reach this point in this item of business is disadvantaging back benchers who wish to put questions to the First Minister. I would be grateful if members could reflect on that.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Presiding Officer,

“As clean energy expands and fossil fuel demand declines ... there is no need for investment in new coal, oil and natural gas.”

That quote is not from the Scottish Green Party manifesto; it is from the International Energy Agency. This week, the Scottish Government continues to equivocate on new licences for oil and gas. The First Minister’s latest position is that the Scottish National Party is okay with new oil and gas if it passes a climate compatibility assessment. How does the First Minister think that any climate compatibility assessment will say that it is okay to drill for new oil when global experts in the energy industry say that it is not?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It has been the Scottish Government’s position for a formidable amount of time—it is certainly not something new this week—that climate compatibility assessments have to be undertaken on any particular new oil and gas licence applications. That has been the Scottish Government’s position for some considerable time.

The Government’s position is that we have got to assess our energy security needs, reduce our emissions in line with our climate commitments and deliver affordable energy supplies. The commitment that I willingly give to Lorna Slater is that the Government recognises the absolute necessity of the journey to net zero, which is why there has to be a climate compatibility assessment on any consideration of oil and gas licensing. That is why I will have no truck with the commitment of the Prime Minister to 100 new oil and gas licences without a question being asked.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Our position on the energy transition needs to be evidence based. That evidence does not change on a case-by-case basis. The Scottish Government’s position is like a 40-a-day smoker being told by the doctor, “Stop smoking. You’re killing yourself,” and the smoker replying, “I’ll treat each cigarette on a case-by-case basis.” That position is not only threatening our environment but putting off investment in the green jobs of the future that our communities so desperately need. When will the Scottish National Party get off the fence, get behind the science on this and admit that Scotland’s future relies on green energy and on Scotland’s oil staying in the ground?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It might just be me, but I am not sure that the analogy that was conveyed in the question worked particularly well. People would expect their Government to act in an evidence-based fashion. That is exactly what we will do. We will look at the evidence in any individual application, although I point out for factual accuracy that we do not take those decisions. Those decisions are taken by the United Kingdom Government, but we would argue for that consideration. That is why I say that a reckless commitment to 100 new oil and gas licences is just the territory of climate denier status, and I will go nowhere near that.

A really good volume of investment in green jobs is being undertaken. The Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy was in Nigg just a few weeks ago at the inauguration of the Sumitomo plant, which has been a fabulous investment in the renewables sector. I was in Ardersier, where there has been a significant investment in green jobs in a project involving the Scottish National Investment Bank and Haventus.

Over the Scottish National Party Government’s time in office, we have substantially decarbonised electricity generation in Scotland, whereby, if my memory serves me right, our net electricity generation has gone from 26 per cent to 113 per cent in the most recent data. All of that demonstrates our commitment to renewable energy, which will be absolutely central to the Government’s energy strategy when it is published.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of any implications for its policy for economic development in Scotland of the findings of the Resolution Foundation’s recent report on the United Kingdom’s economic and trade performance. (S6F-03239)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The report by the Resolution Foundation highlights that the UK has faced a decade of economic stagnation and low productivity growth. It also shows that the UK’s trade openness has declined by 0.7 percentage points since 2019, compared with a 1.2 percentage point rise for G7 countries excluding the United Kingdom. A hard Brexit that Scotland voted to reject has damaged our economy. Scotland is open for business, trade and investment, but actions by the UK Government, such as taking us out of the European Union, and the UK Government’s damaging approach to migration, are holding back our economy. Only independence will give Scotland the full range of powers to take economic decisions that are based on our own needs, with the full fiscal and tax levers of a normal independent country.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

The report indicates that the principal driver of economic growth in the UK since 2010 has been immigration. Will the First Minister outline how the conclusions of the Resolution Foundation report feed into the work of the Scottish Government’s “Building a New Scotland” series, in which the migration paper outlines Scotland’s unique migration needs and proposals designed to meet our demographic challenges?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issue of migration is central to the economic wellbeing of any society. The United Kingdom is putting itself at a formidable competitive disadvantage by taking such a hostile attitude towards migration. We can see that beginning to have an effect on some of our universities, which have been absolutely wonderful examples of international institutions but are now finding their opportunities constrained by the approach to migration, which is damaging to the interests of Scotland. I signal the Scottish Government’s willingness to engage constructively on finding routes to support migration, which will help to boost our economy.

I note the information that was published this week in the Royal Bank of Scotland purchasing managers index report, which showed that, notwithstanding those challenges, private sector business activity growth in Scotland was the second highest across the United Kingdom’s 12 nations and regions, which demonstrates that Scotland is very much open for business.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the First Minister what progress the Scottish Government has made in reducing drug-related harm, in light of the latest quarterly statistics showing a 17 per cent increase in suspected drug deaths. (S6F-03229)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I was disappointed to read the statistics that came out this week. The loss of life from drugs in Scotland is truly devastating, and I express my heartfelt condolences to anyone who has lost a loved one through addiction.

The Government is working to tackle the drugs crisis by delivering the £250 million national mission to reduce the number of drug deaths and improve the lives of those who are impacted by drugs. The mission has led to investment in a range of measures to prevent deaths and reduce harms, including implementation of medication assisted treatment standards, widening naloxone access, increasing residential rehabilitation capacity and improving surveillance.

The emergence of new substances raises further concerns. However, for those who are affected by problem substance use and for those who work in the field supporting people every day, I reinforce our commitment to continue to do all that we can to reduce the tragic loss of life.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The data that was published last week reveals that around 25 people a week are dying from drug use. The new stats that were published this week show that, compared with last year, suspected drug deaths are up 10 per cent in the 12 months to March 2024. The number of deaths is not reducing. The Scottish Recovery Consortium has called that a move in the wrong direction. Will the First Minister explain why successive Scottish National Party leaders have failed to tackle the drug deaths crisis in Scotland and, instead, have followed the same failed approach? Will he finally accept the need to change tack and give us full backing for our right to recovery bill?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I acknowledge the seriousness and significance of the issue. On the question of the proposed right to addiction recovery (Scotland) bill, I have indicated that I will happily meet Douglas Ross to discuss it. I am open to taking seriously any elements of that bill that will help us in our efforts as part of the process. I say to Sue Webber that the Government has tried—and, under my leadership, will continue to try—to be as open as possible to constructing measures that will be effective in delivering better outcomes than we are currently delivering.

At First Minister’s question time a couple of weeks ago, I responded to Sue Webber’s colleague Russell Findlay by indicating that additional threats are coming our way because of the strength of some of the synthetic opioids that are now entering the drugs market in Scotland. That has to be tackled, and we are trying to tackle it.

However, I signal the Government’s willingness to engage constructively across the Parliament to find ways and interventions that will allow us to reduce the number of drug deaths, because I acknowledge the severity and seriousness of the harm that is caused to families and individuals. I remain open to a wide cross-party discussion on that question.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reports that hundreds of rapes and sexual assaults that had been reported by sex workers were not acted upon. (S6F-03233)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I was deeply troubled by those reports. Any violence against women, whenever that has occurred, is abhorrent.

It would not be appropriate for me to comment on criminal investigations and prosecutions, but I note that Police Scotland launched an operation in 2018 to examine historical sex offences. I want all victims to have the confidence to report sexual crimes, no matter when they happened. Therefore, I am pleased that Police Scotland has encouraged anyone who has not previously reported such assaults to come forward and do so.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Scottish Labour endorses the First Minister’s comments on the need to tackle violence against women and girls. However, during the Emma Caldwell murder investigation, nearly 300 rapes and sexual assaults that were reported by sex workers, including those by Emma’s killer, were not dealt with by police at the time. A former detective said that, when he worked on the murder inquiry, he received multiple reports of rape, including by Emma’s killer, but that they were boxed, marked as irrelevant and not followed up.

Does the First Minister agree that that was a shameful period in time when attitudes meant that sex workers who reported rape were not taken seriously, that those women were vulnerable and should have had their chance to be heard before a jury and, furthermore, that if there had been an investigation at the time, Emma’s murderer might have been caught sooner?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Pauline McNeill is a very experienced and long-serving advocate in the whole area of criminal justice, and she knows how much I respect her contribution to Parliament on this matter. She will understand, therefore, that it is difficult for me to comment on some of the issues that she has raised.

Having given that caveat, I absolutely accept that it is a necessity that any reporting of crimes of a sexual nature is taken deadly seriously, and it is my expectation that that will be the case at all times.

I will quote the words of Deputy Chief Constable Bex Smith in relation to this matter. She said:

“Time is no barrier to justice ... and if women feel like they want to come forward and report now, then absolutely it’s the time to do that.”

I encourage individuals to follow the deputy chief constable’s invitation and to do that.

In general—with the caveat that I have put on the record already—I think that it is essential that any woman who feels that they have been the victim of a sexual assault, at any stage, should come forward. My expectation of Police Scotland and of the Crown is that that would be taken seriously.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency questions and general supplementaries.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

On Monday evening, a female passenger on the MV Isle of Arran fell overboard as the vessel approached Ardrossan. Using the vessel’s rescue craft, the crew acted with incredible speed to rescue the woman from the sea and help her to recover on board. The crew’s training and speed of action were the difference between life and death. Will the First Minister join me in paying tribute to the Isle of Arran’s crew for their heroic efforts in saving a life? [ Applause .]

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I record my personal thanks to the master and the crew of the MV Isle of Arran for the speed and intensity of their response. The level of professionalism that was deployed by the crew is to be commended, but, of course, the training and professionalism of members of staff of the CalMac Ferries network is built up through their commitment to ensuring that they run and operate a safe network. That example should give the public great confidence in the strength and capability of CalMac personnel.

As well as providing a lifeline service to communities across the west coast, CalMac is a key part of the maritime framework in those areas and is regularly tasked with supporting maritime incidents, given its presence in the area. On behalf of the Scottish Government, I express my warmest thanks to the staff who were involved in that important exercise.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

For more than nine months, there have been no rail services in my constituency of Galloway and West Dumfries, with all rail services between Stranraer and Ayr having been stopped following the arson attack on the Ayr station hotel. Given the considerable disruption to my constituents and visitors over that lengthy time period, and as an incentive to get people back on to the trains, will the First Minister explore every opportunity to work with me, constituents and ScotRail to provide special offers or reduced fares to encourage people back on to the trains when the service restarts in July?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The good news is that we are able to get services running back down to Stranraer in July. I am grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, ScotRail, Transport Scotland, Network Rail and South Ayrshire Council for the work that has been undertaken, because the problem has been a very difficult one. Mr Carson knows the ins and outs of the public safety issues involved in the fire at the station, and I have just answered a question from Mr Gibson on safety on the transport network, so we all know the realities here.

I will give consideration to Mr Carson’s proposal. Of course, such things always cost money, which we would have to try to find. However, if Mr Carson would care to write to me with any suggestions that he thinks would be helpful, I would be happy to consider them, along with the transport secretary.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister has spent quite some time claiming that he is anti-cuts, but the reality is that he is the architect of austerity. Just ask teachers in Glasgow, who, this week, as a result of his Government’s cuts, have voted to strike in their latest attempt to save their jobs and protect education. Teachers have spoken, parents and pupils have protested and Parliament has voted. Will the First Minister now finally listen, step in and save those jobs?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the significance of the issues that Pam Duncan-Glancy has raised. In previous answers, I have made it clear that, had the Labour Party’s budget proposals been accepted by Glasgow City Council, the reductions in the teaching workforce could have been greater than those that are proposed by the existing city council administration.

However, this is where we get to the hard realities of the public finances. Earlier this year, Pam Duncan-Glancy voted against the tax increases that we had put in place in the budget. That would have reduced the amount of money that is available for public services. [ Interruption .]

How is it remotely credible for the Labour Party to come here and ask me to spend more money on local authority services and education services when it wants to deliver austerity in the Scottish Parliament as well as austerity in the United Kingdom Parliament?

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

That is desperate.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is the hard reality that is about to confront Mr Sarwar, who is shouting and muttering at me all the time during my answers. However, he cannot have it both ways; he cannot come here and demand that we do more when a Westminster Labour Government is going to propose to cut our budget because of austerity.

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

Several constituents have contacted me about eye-watering increases of up to 135 per cent on their Strathclyde Partnership for Transport ZoneCard costs. Some Maryhill commuters are now paying the same as someone travelling from much further afield, such as East Kilbride, for example.

I have written to the SPT asking to meet it and urging it to pause the increases scheduled for 24 June. Does the First Minister share my concerns about the wholly unacceptable increases for my constituents during a cost of living crisis? Are there potential implications for the Scottish Government’s fair fares review and its ambitions to have capped fares and integrated ticketing?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am aware of the issue that Mr Doris raises and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has written to the SPT about it.

The ZoneCard is a commercial ticket that is managed by bus, rail and subway operators. Neither the Scottish Government nor Transport Scotland were part of the fares discussions by the companies involved. We want to make it easier and more affordable for people to choose to travel by public transport, as it will support economic growth, tackle inequality and address climate change.

The fair fares review presents a package of measures to make public transport more accessible, available and affordable, with the cost of transport being more fairly shared across Government, business and society. I hope that some of the thinking in the fair fares review can lead to a different outcome in relation to what is a very significant issue for Mr Doris’s constituents and others in the west of Scotland.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I, too, commend the actions of the crew of the Isle of Arran during the aforementioned incident. I hope that the First Minister will also acknowledge the many on-going disruptions that are taking place on the west coast ferry network.

Yesterday, no fewer than four vessels were out of action for technical reasons. That is on top of long-standing issues on the Arran route, where the Caledonian Isles vessel is undergoing a series of repairs and is due to be out of action for most of the summer. I hope that the First Minister will understand the disruption that that is causing for our island communities. I have grave concerns that we are simply staring down the barrel of a summer of chaos on our ferry network.

What is the First Minister’s Government doing about that chaos? Is he as disappointed as I and my constituents are that not one of his back-bench MSPs signed my motion to allow a members’ business debate on that very subject next week?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There are obviously instances and examples of problems on the ferry network. We have an ageing fleet and the Government is investing significantly in new vessels. There will be six substantial new vessels in the ferry fleet by 2026, the first of which will come into the network later this year. As Mr Greene will be aware, the second of the Islay vessels was launched successfully from the yard in Turkey at the weekend.

On a short-term basis, the chartering of the MV Alfred has helped on the Arran routes while the MV Caledonian Isles has been in dry dock for extensive repairs. We also supplemented the network with the purchase of the MV Loch Frisa.

I understand the disruption that is experienced by island communities. As Mr Greene knows, I am a frequent user of the CalMac network, and I will use it again in the next few weeks. We are working with the network, but it is also important to recognise that the network performs superbly well on many occasions, not just in relation to safety issues that Mr Gibson raised, but also in the delivery of essential lifeline services to our communities. I thank CalMac and its staff for their efforts to do so.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

What is the First Minister’s response to the GMB union’s call for the Scottish Government to end its opposition to nuclear energy? The union has warned of a risk of this nation

“returning to the days of power cuts and candles”,

with

“hundreds of skilled Scots ... already leaving to go abroad”

because of this decline.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I respect the fact that people have a different opinion from me, but I am not a fan of the nuclear industry and I do not support investment in nuclear power plants. I never have and I never will. The country should focus on creating clean, green, renewable energy resources.

We have a formidable track record of investment in Scotland and a formidable record of transformation in the generation of electricity in our country. What would help us is reform of the electricity market in the United Kingdom, which might result in people living in the areas that generate the electricity not having to pay exorbitant energy costs, which is the current procedure in the UK energy market. That might be something that Mr Whitfield could take up with his colleagues, should they be in a position to influence those issues on 5 July and later.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

It is with great sadness that I must report that another person has lost her life on the A9. Our hearts go out to her family and the others who were injured in the incident.

Some weeks ago, at his first First Minister’s question time, the First Minister kindly agreed to meet me and fellow MSPs from the Conservative, Labour, Liberal and Alba parties, in order for us all, on a cross-party basis, to put the case for acceleration of the announced programme for completion of the dualling of the A9, which, of course, will have the consequence of fewer lives being lost. I appreciate that the First Minister is limited in what he can say during purdah, but will he give that request the most serious, thorough and sympathetic consideration?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I echo the comments of my colleague Fergus Ewing about the lady who died last night on the A9 near Carrbridge. I am very sorry to hear that news and I express my sympathies to her family and to everyone who has been affected by the incident.

As Mr Ewing will know, the Government has an on-going programme of investment in the A9 dualling—it was set out by the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy some months ago. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport now expects to authorise the procurement for the Moy to Tomatin stretch in July. That is our expectation of the completion of the procurement process there.

Just the other week, the procurement process for the Tay crossing to Ballinluig, which is a substantial stretch of the road, was commenced. We did that deliberately to ensure that there is continuity in the delivery of the contract.

Mr Ewing knows me well enough to know that I will give thorough, serious and thoughtful consideration to all the proposals that are put to me, and I look forward to the cross-party group meeting, which I understand is scheduled for next week, to enable me to hear at first hand from colleagues across the chamber about the importance of the issue and how we might act together to accelerate the proposals that are before us.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s questions. There will be a short suspension before the next item of business to allow those who are leaving the chamber or the gallery to do so.

Kindergarten Stage

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-12369, in the name of Fulton MacGregor, on fostering a discussion on a kindergarten stage in Scotland.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament acknowledges the body of international evidence on the reported benefits of play-based early years education; believes that active, social play is a natural learning drive that helps develop physical fitness, social skills, cognitive capacities and personal qualities; understands that Scotland and the rest of the UK are outliers in Europe in starting formal education at four or five years of age; considers that, since the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) comparisons began, countries with later school starting ages have performed better than those with earlier starts; understands that the UN defines early childhood as being from birth to eight years of age, and that Scottish research has established that there are significant differences in children’s levels of development at age five; commends the work of organisations such as Upstart Scotland in promoting the needs of children in early years education based on relationship-centred, child-led, play-based environments, with a greater focus on outdoor learning; notes the belief that a universal play-based kindergarten stage, with a raised formal school starting age, could contribute to closing the attainment gap and be a significant anti-poverty measure, and that it would help provide a true level playing field for all of Scotland’s children, including those in the Coatbridge and Chryston constituency, giving every child time to develop the skills and capacities that underpin educational success, improving long-term outcomes and giving every child the best start in life, and further notes the belief that there is a need for a national conversation on early years education to consider a later school starting age preceded by a relationship-centred, play-based kindergarten stage to support optimal development during early childhood and ensure secure foundations, and that such a conversation should be open to all who wish to contribute, including early years practitioners, parents, teachers, academics and children, as well as policy makers.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

First, I thank all members who have supported my motion, which calls for a discussion on a kindergarten stage in Scotland. I pay particular thanks to my colleague Kaukab Stewart for initially leading the discussion on the topic prior to her promotion to Government.

The tendency for children to start formal education at four or five years old means that Scotland—and indeed the United Kingdom, for that matter—is an outlier in Europe. Our tradition of starting school at that age was enshrined in the Education (Scotland) Act 1872. That piece of legislation was groundbreaking for ensuring that every child got an education. However, since then, there has been a century and a half of research and improved understanding of child psychology and development, and we have an archaic mindset. Looking across Europe, we see that delaying starting academic studies is becoming more widespread, with many countries opting for their children to start school at six or even seven years old.

Change is possible. In Scotland today, the deferment of a four-year-old child is now the decision of the parent or legal guardian, thanks to the tireless work of the Give Them Time campaign. Its campaign for a further year of nursery funding for all children who defer their primary 1 start in Scotland was a resounding success, and it reflects the change in attitudes on school starting ages that we are seeing in Scotland today. I put on record my thanks to all those involved in that campaign. I know that they support the kindergarten model, too.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I echo everything that Fulton MacGregor has just said. Does he agree with me that Diane Delaney is an absolute trailblazer when it comes to campaigning and highlighting those issues?

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I completely agree with the member: Diane Delaney, who is a constituent of both hers and mine, is certainly that.

At its most basic level, a kindergarten stage is a stage whereby the emphasis of a child’s education is more on opportunities for children to play. It is a way for children to learn through enjoyable experiences rather than formal teaching. It is underpinned by the development of social and communication skills, teacher-led opportunities for art, drama, music, science or maths investigations and listening to stories.

The benefits of such a stage are self-evident. Physically, it promotes physical self-confidence and bodily control. Mentally, it allows children’s creativity to flourish, as well as helping to develop self-control and problem solving. Socially, it provides a perfect opportunity for children to progress their interpersonal skills, such as communication, empathy and teamwork. Cognitively, play-based learning can improve a child’s innate understanding of mathematical and scientific concepts.

A kindergarten stage would not be free time for the children to do as they please; rather, it would be an educational approach that supports not just their academic development but their all-round physical, emotional, social and cognitive development.

Another key component of that play-based approach is access to the outdoors and increased contact with the natural world. Today, fewer of our children spend time outdoors. It is no surprise that they often stay inside instead and are more likely to be watching television or engaging with our ever-increasing digital world. Anybody who is a parent—as I am—knows exactly what that looks like. With outdoor play being such an important part of kindergartens globally, a kindergarten stage could give all Scottish children time and space to develop the habits of outdoor play, which promote mental and physical health and wellbeing.

For those who fear that focusing on those aspects will inhibit academic achievement, a large body of research has found the opposite to be the case. In fact, promoting physical, emotional, social and cognitive development has been shown to promote and complement academic achievement. In essence, a kindergarten stage, rather than throwing children in at the deep end when they are just four or five years old, can give children the tools to cope with the rigours of academic stresses.

I have spoken a lot about the hypothetical benefits, but I will present some facts. It might be a surprise to some to learn that, ever since the programme for international student assessment—PISA—comparisons began, countries with an early school starting age have not performed as well as those in which formal education starts later. In 66 per cent of countries worldwide, children start school at age six; in 22 per cent, they start at age seven; and in only 12 per cent do they start at age four or five. Last year, the best-performing countries were China, Singapore, Estonia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Taiwan, Finland, Poland and Ireland. Four of those—China, Estonia, Finland and Poland—have a school starting age of seven. In the rest, children start school at six. None starts them at five.

UNICEF surveys of children’s wellbeing have continually shown a correlation between countries with later school starting ages and improvements in children’s wellbeing.

In the campaign to foster a discussion on a kindergarten stage in Scotland, particular credit must lie with Upstart Scotland, which has representatives joining us in the gallery this afternoon—I am not sure whether they are in yet. Upstart Scotland has made it its mission to promote and advocate for a kindergarten stage to be introduced in Scotland. Its website is full of invaluable information, academic sources and holistic discourse that support the advancement of that play-based stage being considered in Scotland. I think that Upstart Scotland representatives are coming into the gallery now.

The conversation about the topic is growing. Last month, I hosted a round-table meeting that brought together Scottish education stakeholders and a group of Norwegian kindergarten practitioners. That meeting concentrated on a discussion about the different education systems of Norway and Scotland, with a particular focus on the Norwegian kindergarten system. Those Norwegian kindergarten staff work in a small private kindergarten with 20 children. Their focus areas were farming, food production and outdoor living, as well as other areas of learning. It was eye opening to learn how beneficial that opportunity is for the Norwegian children, especially in showing how that stage empowers children in so many ways at such an early age.

Most strikingly perhaps is the evidence that a later formal school setting can help to close the attainment gap. We know that a key goal of the Scottish Government is to close the poverty-related attainment gap. It would be presumptuous to assume that changing educational policy alone could close that gap, but a play-based stage for all across Scotland has the power to level the playing field and provide children from impoverished backgrounds with the similar experiences and support that those in more advantaged circumstances are provided with.

To put it bluntly, when children are expected to make the transition from a nursery setting to a formal school environment with an emphasis on literacy and numeracy at a time when they are only halfway through their early years, disadvantaged children are put at an even further disadvantage as they must catch up in the areas of problem solving and language development.

I know that some schools take a play-based approach in primary 1—the minister might come to that. For example, the school that my children go to does that now. It did not do that for my oldest child, but it does for my middle child. The point is that the approach is not consistent enough even within local authority areas, never mind across the country.

There would, of course, be challenges in adopting the approach. Our current system of early years learning and our nursery sector would have to be revisited. There would be the obvious question of how we would deliver the additional training required for new and existing early years staff. There have been encouraging developments on that with Play Scotland’s work with the Scottish Qualifications Authority on a play pedagogy qualification, which has just been recognised with accredited status. Any national discussion must include an assessment of training needs and the identification of where training will come from and who will deliver it, along with a costed programme for implementation.

Likewise, our current mix of local authority provision, private, voluntary and independent childcare and the primary 1 and 2 years would have to be co-ordinated to deliver the kindergarten stage, which would require to be financed. I do not deny that that will be a challenge, but I firmly believe that it is one well worth taking on. I do not have the time today to provide a forensic examination of the costs, but this is only the beginning of a discussion.

Scotland is still set in its Victorian approach to formal learning. Although the discussion is at an early stage, we must seriously consider the range of benefits that introducing a kindergarten stage could bring to our children. I can understand why some may have reservations, but that is not a new idea. Countries that have introduced such a stage have seen hugely improved and well-rounded development for their children. I will continue advocating on the topic and encourage all parties to dedicate time to researching the potential value of having kindergartens in Scotland.

I again thank Upstart Scotland and the numerous other stakeholders that have diligently and convincingly set out the arguments to modernise the Scottish education system and to bring us into line with our European neighbours.

I will close with an abridged quote from Sue Palmer, Upstart’s honorary president:

“No child should be in school at the age of five ... The poverty-related attainment gap is at root a developmental issue. By starting formal teaching too soon, we consolidate this gap. Too-early introduction to formal learning generates anxiety which can affect one's mental health for life.”

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Mr MacGregor, I have been very generous, but you are now at almost 10 minutes. Please complete your speech.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I will leave it there, Presiding Officer.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Thank you, Mr MacGregor. My clock is at nine minutes and 52 seconds. The chamber one was not switched on, in error.

We now move to the open debate. I urge members to stick to their allotted time of up to four minutes.

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

I am pleased to speak in the debate and I thank Fulton MacGregor for bringing it to the chamber. I am particularly keen to see a wider debate about whether to move to a kindergarten system and stage in Scotland, delaying the commencement of formal education to perhaps six or even seven.

As the motion says, such an approach is not uncommon internationally, with countries taking that approach often having higher levels of attainment than produced by our UK system. I can see the advantage in having an expanded and structured play-based system in Scotland. Fulton MacGregor suggests that there would be benefits for physical fitness, social skills and cognitive capacity more generally, which would put in place the building blocks for longer-term learning and enhancing children’s personal qualities.

As anyone would do when looking at changes to the school system, I tend to think of my own family. My son could have gone to school at four but went at five years old, when he was certainly more than ready to go to school. He went to a superb nursery, but he was ready to move on, so the question we must ask ourselves is what children move on to.

There are play-based activities in primary 1 and onwards anyway, so perhaps those could be expanded and a hybrid system could be introduced to the early years of primary school, instead of expanding the early years sector. That might be a possibility. That is my way of saying that I am willing to be convinced about having a kindergarten stage, which is what our conversation is all about.

I want to know about the interaction between core literacy and numeracy skills and how they will be enhanced at that early stage as part of active play and structured learning in a delivery model that is different to the current one. Interestingly, I was told at a recent parents night that there will be a more structured and traditional approach to learning for my son when he enters primary 4 in mid-August. We can already see that schools and local authorities are seeking to innovate from primary 1 to primary 3 and will continue doing so.

I remember, when my son was in primary 1, that parents, including us, asked why the kids did not have pens or pencils in their hands and were not doing a lot of writing. It was explained to us that working with young people’s emotions, interpersonal skills, self-worth and dignity is vitally important and is a really good foundation for later life and, importantly, for learning. That is my way of saying that some of what Fulton McGregor wants—maybe just a wee bit—might be starting to evolve naturally in the innovation that is happening in primary schools now and that I am willing to be convinced about a more dramatic shift.

It is a fascinating idea. I think that we would have to build a lot of faith with many parents, who would be saying in response, just as I would be, “Where is my kid’s jotter? Where is their pencil? Where is their homework?” and all those kinds of things that we naturally come to expect. If we are developing and innovating, we have to take parents and young people with us; it is vitally important to have the conversation. I have a wee girl who is three, and as a dad, as much as an MSP, I am interested to know what that would look like for me and my family, as well as for all the families that I am proud to represent in Maryhill and Springburn.

Given the time constraints, I will leave it there. I thank Fulton MacGregor for securing the debate.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank Fulton MacGregor for lodging the motion for debate in the chamber and for continuing the work of Kaukab Stewart. I will quickly mention my respect for the inclusion of his constituency, Coatbridge and Chryston, in the motion. I will be a little bit open now. My gran was born and raised in Gartsherrie, along with seven brothers and sisters. After working with the Salvation Army in London, she returned—I hope that Mr MacGregor will forgive the slight diversion—to a neighbouring constituency in Garrowhill. My great-grandfather was the leader of the Gartsherrie silver band, although I was not old enough to hear him play, and my dad went to Coatbridge high school. I have an awful lot of fondness for the area that Mr MacGregor represents. However, I digress.

The motion is about fostering a discussion on a kindergarten stage in Scotland, and I look forward to discussing how that could be done and what the model and the implications of it would be, whether those are unintended or otherwise. I commend Upstart Scotland and other organisations for the work that they do to highlight the importance of an early years education that is based on creative play and social connection. When we think about it, that is not a surprising idea: when I started working at the Parliament a couple of years ago, I was not used to the phone that I was given, so I played with it for a while until I understood its functions. We are more likely to understand how things work by doing and trying, than by sitting and reading a manual. That is human nature.

How our brain functions in formative years should inform early years childcare as well as our educational and societal processes. The Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University noted that

“When children have opportunities to develop executive function and self-regulation skills, individuals and society experience lifelong benefits. These skills are crucial for learning and development. They also enable positive behaviour and allow us to make healthy choices”.

It went on to say:

“Providing the support that children need to build these skills at home, in early care and education programs, and in other settings they experience regularly is one of society’s most important responsibilities. Growth-promoting environments provide children with ‘scaffolding’ that helps them practice necessary skills before they must perform them alone.”

Understanding the process for developing cognitive function is imperative, as it has many bearings on the issues in society that we are trying to address. Encompassing that in our early years education system will support all children, regardless of their background.

If we are all of one mind—and so far, I think that we are—and we proceed with advancing a discussion about the kindergarten model for Scotland, it is essential that we do not minimise the options that we research right out of the gate. The Nordic models are regularly highlighted in discussions. Indeed, Upstart Scotland focused on the Finnish model and a recent report from Parenting across Scotland pushes a Swedish one. It may be the case that those models fit in well with Scottish anthropology, but we should not presume that a Singaporean model or a Canadian model would not work in Scotland. Upstart Scotland highlighted that very point on its website. Mr MacGregor has already referred to it, by noting that, in 2023, the best performing countries were, in descending order: China, Singapore, Estonia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Taiwan, Finland, Poland and Ireland. China, Estonia, Finland and Poland have a school starting age of seven, and the rest have a school starting age of six.

In conclusion, we should fully embrace the opportunity, but it is not the time to limit the scope of the discussion: we need to look around the world rather than just across the water.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

It is a pleasure to take part in what is perhaps one of the more fascinating members’ business debates. Along with others, I thank Fulton MacGregor for bringing it to the chamber.

There is an interesting discussion over a pedagogy, a fixed asset—our current schooling system—and the needs of our individual children. A lot of parents will echo Bob Doris’s comment that his child was ready to start school. Similarly, there are parents who recognise that their child is not ready to start school, and there is the option to extend that nursery year, as we have discussed.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

This point is for Martin Whitfield as well as for Bob Doris. Does he accept that it is not just about whether a child is ready for school? Both my children who have gone to school so far were “ready” at five. It is about whether, if we were to change the system altogether so that children do not go to school at five, that would be better for society as a whole. That is the point that has been made by all the countries where the school age is already higher than five.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I am very grateful for that intervention, which speaks to the heart of what I am going to talk about. The way to look at this is to look at the young people themselves—from babies and young children—all the way through.

Intellectually, we can identify that initial movement of a baby just thrashing around on a mat as unoccupied play. Then there is the sort of solitary play in which a child does not want to be with anyone else, except perhaps their mother or father. Then there is spectator play, in which they observe other children playing. Then there is parallel play, in which they sit down—often in a sandpit, with their hands in—and play by themselves but next to others. Then there is associative play, in which they want to start involving others. Finally, there is co-operative play, which is very much at the foundation of play pedagogy and what organisations talk about. The ability not to argue with the child next to them because they have taken a piece of Lego, the ability to solve a problem because they want something on the other side of the table that they cannot reach, and the ability to be helped up by one of their young comrades when they fall over a root in the forest are all the very soft but essential skills that are required.

That sits at the heart of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, in articles 31 and 29. I will spend the short time that I have on that in particular. Article 29 talks about education being

“directed to ... The development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential”.

How we support that approach—how we scaffold that and provide the environment to achieve it—is not fixed by adults’ decisions that “at this age, you do this, and at that age you do that.” It is about understanding the flexible needs.

Mention has been made of existing schools in which play, particularly in P1 and P2, is such an important element. However, it has taken many years to move what is at the heart of the curriculum for excellence about the use of play into the classrooms—if I can use that phrase. I visit schools and watch P1s in the most wonderful outdoor play areas. I talked about fixed assets and mention has been made of training. We have wonderful early years workers, but of course they need support and training. It is also about the facilities and experiences that our young people and children have the opportunity to be in. It is right to mention Charlotte Bowes and #Play4P1, because the network of support that is there for practitioners is phenomenal.

I am conscious of time, Deputy Presiding Officer. To open the discussion is very important, but just to sit with a formulaic idea of replacing the start of school at four or five with something else is to miss the opportunity to have a transitional experience for young people so that they learn through play not just up to eight but into adulthood, and are ready to take the next steps, supported by the communities around them.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

As colleagues have done, I congratulate Fulton MacGregor on securing the debate, and I thank Upstart Scotland, Give Them Time and everyone else who has long campaigned in this space.

The Scottish Greens were proud to propose a kindergarten stage in our manifesto for the most recent election to this Parliament. Specifically, we proposed a kindergarten stage between the ages of three and six, and formal primary school starting at seven, which would bring Scotland into line with Finland and a number of other high-performing nations that Roz McCall mentioned a moment ago.

I recognise that other members would prefer a kindergarten for ages three to five and school starting at six. It is important to tease out that detail but, at this stage, the priority is on the agreement in principle to move forward with the conversation, because a consensus is emerging.

Why should we raise the starting age for formal primary school? We should start by recognising that the status quo in Scotland and across the UK is not correct just because that is how it has always been—as Fulton MacGregor mentioned—since the Victorian era. We are an international outlier in putting four-and-a-half-year-olds into formal schooling.

I will start by addressing one of the myths about the proposals. Those of us who advocate for a kindergarten stage are not proposing that we delay a child’s education. We believe that that education would be better if we delayed the start of formal primary school and established a kindergarten stage.

A couple of years ago, I commissioned Dr Kylie Bradfield and Professor Mark Priestley to summarise the evidence for and against kindergarten and raising the primary school starting age. The arguments for the status quo—the very early school starting age in the UK—were rarely based on educational benefits.

Two primary benefits are usually cited for what we currently have. The first is child protection because, for many vulnerable children, school is the safest place for them to be. However, kindergarten would of course be an equally safe place.

The second benefit is an economic argument that children who start school earlier generally enter the workforce earlier and, therefore, work for longer before they retire. However, I think that that is a bit of a soulless argument, because we are more than units of labour.

When young people start school at a later age, there is clear evidence of better educational attainment throughout their time in school. In fact, Ashlesha Datar’s 2006 study found a bigger, long-term educational attainment benefit for vulnerable and at-risk children who started later rather than earlier. Another significant advantage is that a number of studies have found mental health benefits—by the time that they reach their late teens—for young people who start formal schooling at a later rather than younger age and have the kindergarten experience first.

Much of that comes back to the simple concept of joy. Children should enjoy learning and enjoy their time at nursery, kindergarten and school. Play-based learning at a kindergarten stage means that, for many children, their first experience of education is a joyful one—not the jarring one that a number of us experienced as we moved from nursery into a more formal primary school setting.

That is why the Scottish Greens manifesto proposes that three-to-six kindergarten stage. We want children to be happy and to enjoy learning. We want education policy to be evidence based. I absolutely agree with Roz McCall that we need to look globally at the substantial evidence base that is out there.

In closing, I pay credit, as Martin Whitfield did, to the teachers in schools who are already delivering play-based learning, particularly in primary 1 but, in many cases, up to primary 3. Practice has already shifted in our schools, but our system is holding us back from fully realising the benefits of that.

I urge the Scottish Government to take that conversation forward with the experts—the unions that represent teachers and early years staff, councils and, of course, parents and carers. Much like exam reform at the other end of the formal school experience, it is time to leave behind the Victorian-era constraints that we still have on our education system, and move to a kindergarten stage where we can give children the joyful first experience of education that they deserve. [ Applause .]

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Our guests in the gallery are very welcome and I am glad that you made it for part of the debate, but we do not invite gallery guests to clap during our proceedings. I am sure that, now that you know, you will heed that.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I was not intending to say anything in this debate, but members have made very thought-provoking contributions. I have to say that I am a stickler when it comes to this issue and will talk about improving the lives of children and young people at every given opportunity.

This week, I received in my inbox a fascinating manifesto pledge by the campaign group 2020 Together entitled “It’s all about the children”. It had a launch last week; unfortunately, I was unable to attend, due to other commitments, but I think that it hits home in showing the importance of the early years to a child’s development.

Back in 2016, the Scottish Government promised to provide 1,140 hours of free childcare to children from the ages of three to five, which is exactly the age range that we are talking about today as we look at how we advance the learning experience of children and young people from a really early age. I do think that we need to look at what we have right now before we look at what we can do in the future, because we need those structures to be in place if this sort of scheme is to work. Indeed, Fulton MacGregor touched on that in this speech. The early years offering that we have just now will need to be relooked at, should we embark on this huge challenge, but I do think that it is a challenge worth embarking on.

The manifesto that I mentioned contains some really important elements, and I would appreciate it if the minister and I could discuss it, perhaps not today, but at some point in the future. It comes from a group of active campaigners in my region who want to make sure that the experience for children at the early stages of their lives is the best that it possibly can be. Although the early years offering just now has been positive for local authorities, it has certainly not been as positive for the private, voluntary and independent sector. Although the nurseries in that sector provide the same level of care for children, and although their staff have the same qualifications as those in local authority settings, the pay disparity between the two settings is stark. Someone in a private, voluntary and independent nursery will get a living wage of around £12 an hour, while someone in a job in a local authority early years setting will get roughly £16 an hour.

That makes clear the disparity that exists for those trying to give our young people the best possible start in life. We can see how things are already on an unequal footing, even before we begin to look at redeveloping childcare and early years according to the terms of today’s debate on a kindergarten stage and on learning through play. That sort of learning is vital to a child’s development. Indeed, I know that for myself; my toddler, who is going to be two next month, challenges me every single day to learn through play, and I have thoroughly enjoyed that experience with her.

As I have said, in looking at this issue as a whole, we need to look at what we are offering just now, get the structures and pillars in place and sort out the fundamental problems. Once we do that, we will have the right opportunity to look at how we can improve things and create and develop something new for Scotland that gives children the best possible start in life. I therefore challenge the minister to look at what we have just now and fix the problems with the provision of 1,140 hours to ensure that, when we come to look at the kindergarten stage, we are starting from the best possible place. That is what will benefit our children best, and that, after all, is the most important thing that we as parliamentarians can do.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I call Natalie Don to respond to the debate. You have up to seven minutes, minister.

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

I am thankful to Fulton MacGregor for bringing this debate to the chamber, and I truly welcome the many excellent contributions that we have had from members and which have been informed by research and evidence from Upstart Scotland. I whole-heartedly agree that it is important to give our children the best possible start in life, and I strongly support this opportunity to foster an open dialogue on the best way of achieving that over the longer term.

I note the points that many colleagues have raised about the international evidence on the benefits of play-based early years education; on the benefits of active social play; on the issue of Scotland’s school starting age when compared with other European countries, and the fact that it has not changed since the 19th century; and on how a universal play-based kindergarten stage with a raised formal school starting age could contribute to closing the attainment gap. These are very important considerations that I take seriously and am interested in exploring further.

I absolutely recognise the critical importance of children’s early years experiences to their life outcomes, particularly when those children grow up in disadvantaged circumstances. I am aware that, since the pandemic, there has been an increase in the proportion of children who are not meeting their developmental milestones, and that there are persistent inequalities between children living in the most and the least deprived areas, so the debate is timely and important.

Members might not hear me say this often, but I whole-heartedly agree with some of what Meghan Gallacher says, because we do need to look at what is happening now. However, there have been huge achievements, and I will talk about some of them. Since 2014, we have undertaken one of the most significant reforms to public services in a generation. We have almost doubled the entitlement to high-quality funded early learning and childcare from 600 to 1,140 hours per year for all eligible children. We know that provision of high-quality ELC makes an important contribution to children’s outcomes, particularly, as I said, when they are growing up in disadvantaged circumstances. There has been near-universal uptake of the offer of funded ELC among three and four-year-olds, and independent research has shown that 97 per cent of parents are satisfied with the quality of funded ELC.

We should not underestimate what an achievement that is. However, and as I have said in Parliament, I do not shy away from specific concerns on rates. I have discussed that with many members, and I continue to discuss it with stakeholders such as 2020 Together. The member is aware of the on-going work on the rates review, and I am happy to discuss that further with the member. I do not feel that this debate is necessarily the right place for that discussion, because I have a lot that I would like to get through.

Another important achievement that we need to highlight—which other members have also highlighted—is on deferring school entry. Mr MacGregor rightly mentioned the tireless efforts of the Give Them Time campaign. As a result of those efforts, since 23 August, all children who defer their school entry are automatically entitled to that additional year of funded ELC. I know that members agree that that is a very important step forward in supporting parents to make those critical decisions in the best interests of their child, without the worry of additional costs.

I am a huge advocate of our approach in Scotland of promoting play-based, child-centred and outdoor learning in the early years. That is critical to supporting children to recover from the impacts of the pandemic, including in respect of their early language development, which is an area of children’s development that has been particularly affected.

I always like to bring in my personal experiences of witnessing excellent practice in person. On my recent visit to Little Bugs outdoor nursery in Dunfermline, I saw how outdoor learning and play benefits children in respect of their physical health and mental, social and emotional wellbeing. Children in ELC spend on average 39 per cent of their time outdoors. We are making very good progress on that.

That kind of excellent practice can also be delivered in the early years of primary school, because of the flexibility of Scotland’s curriculum for excellence, including the early level, which deliberately spans from age three until the end of primary 1. Our internationally recognised practice guidance, “Realising the ambition: Being Me”, is driving forward efforts to support child-centred play and ensure continuity and progression in learning as children begin their primary school education.

Martin Whitfield spoke about the UNCRC and the need for a child’s education to be tailored to that child. “Realising the ambition: Being Me” is wholly focused on that. Upstart Scotland has said:

“If this document can be translated into practice in all Scottish early years settings (including P1), Scotland’s ELC provision will be up there with the Nordic countries”.

It is imperative that we continue in our current efforts to ensure that realising the ambition is effectively and consistently implemented in early learning and childcare and in the early years of primary school. As Fulton MacGregor stated, there has been excellent progress in recent years. I saw that at first hand when I visited Roslin primary school last year, a visit that I have spoken of previously in the chamber.

I know that we still have some way to go to ensure that play pedagogy is fully embedded at the early level. To bring some of that together, I am keen that we understand fully the impact of implementing “Realising the ambition” and our transformational investment in ELC and the deferrals policy, which could help to inform any further major reforms. The final report on the evaluation of the expansion of funded ELC to 1,140 hours is due to be published by the end of 2025.

It is important to highlight that an ambitious programme of education and skills reform is under way to improve outcomes for people who experience and deliver education in Scotland. Members have referred to Upstart Scotland’s evidence, which shows that countries with a later school starting age perform better than those where formal education starts earlier. I am therefore open to exploring options for what a kindergarten stage would entail, building on the progress that has been made to date and the evaluation of our early years policies. On the specific points about PISA, I am interested in considering the data in further detail, alongside wider evidence.

We cannot shy away from the fact that introducing a kindergarten stage would be a fundamental change to our education system. All members who contributed touched on the factors that would need to be considered. It would require significant further work to take stock of the evidence, to understand the views of families, which Bob Doris rightly highlighted, and, of course, those of children, and to consider carefully both the costs involved and the implications for our workforce. However, I want to be clear with members that I have listened carefully to the views that have been expressed in the debate. I am open to discussing the best approach with members from across the chamber and examining the matters that would need to be considered.

I again thank members who have contributed to this important discussion. I share their vision for early years education being based on relationship-centred, child-led and play-based environments with a greater focus on outdoor learning. I look forward to working with colleagues from across the chamber and with organisations such as Upstart Scotland to make that a reality for all of Scotland’s children.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate. I suspend the meeting until 2 pm.

Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Good afternoon. The next item of business is Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body question time.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will review the process for admitting visitors to the public gallery in the chamber. (S6O-03585)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Our key priorities for admitting visitors to the public gallery are ensuring public safety, minimising disruption to chamber business and the security of the Parliament. We always want to ensure that visitors enjoy the experience and feel that they are participating in our work, and I welcome any feedback on the process.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Members’ business debates are a brilliant opportunity for MSPs to raise issues that matter to their constituents. However, during my debate last month, constituents from Angus and Aberdeenshire were unable to hear my opening remarks because they were still filing in, which was disappointing for them because they had travelled so far.

I have attended other members’ business debates at which visitors were seated at the back of the gallery, as is the case today, with plenty of seats at the front remaining unused, which we can also see today. I welcome the points about experience and safety, but we can clearly see that the situation is not acceptable. Will the corporate body consider reviewing processes in the people’s Parliament to ensure that opening speeches do not begin until all visitors are seated, and that better use is made of the seating arrangements?

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I recognise the member’s frustration, and I have also been in that situation in relation to members’ business debates. Effort is made to ensure that the public gallery is seated in advance of the start of any debate, but there can be delays, particularly with Thursday afternoon debates, when members of the public are leaving after First Minister’s question time. FMQs is usually busy and we have only one door in and out of the gallery.

As the member said, the members’ business debates generate great interest, and people often travel great distances to get here. I agree that they should be seated for the opening speech, and I also agree that we should have greater flexibility in the seating arrangements in the gallery. A small working group between the various offices will be set up over recess to look to improve that experience.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether any of its contracted catering companies source produce or products from occupied land in Gaza or the West Bank. (S6O-03583)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Catering services at the Scottish Parliament are provided through our service partner, Sodexo. There is a focus on using local and seasonal products where possible. I am advised by Sodexo that none of its products is grown or supplied from occupied land in Gaza or the West Bank.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The corporate body will be aware that the Scottish Government has a clear procurement policy note that states:

“Exploitation of assets in illegal settlements ... is likely to be regarded as constituting ‘grave professional misconduct’ for the purposes of procurement law”.

Does the SPCB share that view, and will it undertake to review the products that it sources to ensure that none comes from illegal settlements?

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I appreciate the points that the member has raised. The corporate body will discuss those points, look at our procurement policy and engage with Sodexo. The member might be interested to know that the catering contract will be put out to tender within the next couple of years.

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

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it would consider increasing the £500 annual training budget that is allocated to MSP offices for staff training. (S6O-03586)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Following a review in 2021 of the reimbursement of members’ expenses scheme, the corporate body delegated authority to the Scottish parliamentary service learning and development team to approve up to £500 per member annually through the incidental and ancillary employment cost provision to facilitate any additional ad hoc job-specific training needs, such as attending seminars and conferences.

Claims in excess of that amount have to be submitted to the SPCB for approval. However, current expenditure against the expenses scheme is extremely low. In 2023-24, there were just four claims against the scheme. Therefore, the corporate body’s view is that there is no current requirement to increase the provision.

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

I would emphasise that knowledge, experience and office size can vary, as can costs, because of where constituency offices are situated in the country, for example. As an addition to what the member has just described and to the £500 annual budget per office, perhaps a more individualised proposal system could be implemented for training, whereby members can source external training opportunities that would suit their office need and then seek approval from allowances for them, on a case-by-case basis in a timeous and practical way. That would help to deliver more flexible and tailored development opportunities for all staff.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I hear what Mr Macpherson says. As well as the scheme that I have identified—the members expenses scheme that was agreed in 2021—a central budget for MSP staff learning and development is in place to deliver all recurring training needs for MSP staff. That budget is managed by the SPCB’s learning and development team. The corporate body is keen to maximise the central budget to the benefit of all MSP staff, in order to realise economies of scale and value for money while ensuring equal and fair access. However, we will look further at Mr Macpherson’s suggestion.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

I back what Ben Macpherson has said about the budget. I found outsourcing of training for parliamentary staff in my constituency office extremely difficult. Will the member say a wee bit more about what could be available and what could be done to ensure that constituency staff in rural and island areas are able to meet their parliamentary colleagues more regularly for training?

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

As I indicated, there is the £500 dispensation. It is also possible for claims in excess of that to be made and for them to be considered by the corporate body.

More generally, the current corporate body has taken the decision to have a comprehensive review of the entire structure of membership expenses, with a view to making recommendations for the next parliamentary session. Obviously, we will learn from the experience of the provision that we have had during the current parliamentary session to see whether there need to be changes that would accommodate some of the concerns that are being expressed, specifically with regard to Beatrice Wishart’s constituency office as well as others who might be in a similar position.

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

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how much of its annual budget is allocated to the provision of BSL services to ensure that the Parliament is accessible to those who use BSL, in light of the 2022 census results showing that BSL is used by 117,300 people, or 2.2 per cent of the population. (S6O-03584)

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

I thank the member for the question and recognise her work to raise the profile and use of British Sign Language in the Scottish Parliament.

Although inclusion is more complex than a simple pro rata of budgets per population using a language, each year we spend around £90,000 to £100,000 on our services and staff to support and grow BSL inclusion.

The SPCB is proud of its achievements through its first BSL plan and is about to launch the consultation on its second plan. The second plan will build on our current work, not least in continuing to expand the proportion of chamber business that is BSL interpreted from the current level of around 12 per cent, and in continuing to provide interpretation of every First Minister’s question time.

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

In response to my previous question to the SPCB on the wider roll-out of BSL accessibility, I was advised to raise the issue at the Conveners Group, which I have done, and I was advised there that the Parliament does not have the necessary resources to facilitate BSL accessibility across all committee work.

Although recent efforts have been commendable, deaf people and BSL users want to be included in more issues than just those that affect their communication needs. They seek inclusion in all areas of democracy. Can the SPCB allocate the necessary resources to ensure that those individuals have direct access to all democratic processes, thereby promoting true inclusivity in our parliamentary system?

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

The member might be interested to know that we interpreted or translated into BSL 12 per cent of chamber business in the first five months of this year, 15 per cent of our committee calls for views, and 20 per cent of our festival of politics events in 2023, which has risen to more than 30 per cent in the 2024 programme.

However, I return to the fact that we are launching our draft BSL2 plan to build on that work, not least in continuing to expand BSL-interpreted chamber business, as well as providing interpretation of every FMQ. The member raises an important issue, so if she can be more specific about what she requires, particularly with regard to committees, I am sure that we can explore and consider that in the draft BSL2 plan.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Sharon Dowey is joining us online for question 5.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will provide an update on the review commissioned by the security team, in light of the protest that took place on 21 February 2024. (S6O-03582)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The protest on 21 February was the first time that a protest at the Parliament attempted to physically prevent the public from entering the building. The review has highlighted that communications to those in the building, those trying to leave the building and those arriving were not good enough, and that some people were left feeling unsafe.

The security office conducted a lessons-learned review and developed a set of rapid communications that will be deployed in real time to building occupants and those known to be travelling to the building. Work has progressed in the security office on response plans for disruptive protests, and work is under way with events organisers to make it easier to communicate quickly with those who are expected to attend events.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

On the night in question, following the blockage of one exit by protesters, the Parliament’s security team directed members and guests to an alternative exit. However, it appeared that the protesters quickly moved to that new location and continued their harassment and abuse. I spoke with the people who were in the Parliament building that night, including young apprentices, some of whom were in tears. They spoke of concerns about their safety and treatment. Has the corporate body identified any involvement from a member or their staff in providing inside information to protesters? If so, what consequences will be applied to address that behaviour?

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I understand that the member has corresponded with the Presiding Officer on those matters. At the time, there were suggestions that a pass holder was providing information to protesters on where to protest. The security office looked into that claim, including reviewing closed-circuit television and speaking to staff on duty at the time. However, no evidence has been found to support that allegation.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will provide an update on how it is widening access to its educational services. (S6O-03548)

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

The education service is a key part of our public engagement strategy delivery and actively works to sustain and grow a wide reach of schools that use it. Our recent members’ feedback surveys reflected positive experiences, as well as the challenges that some schools are facing in travelling to Edinburgh.

As we have informed members previously, the subsidy review is part of the SPCB’s public engagement strategy. That is under a review that is due to conclude in the autumn. Any changes to the priorities of the education service would flow from that, given the important role that the service plays in its delivery.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Educational visits to Parliament provide pupils with a first-hand experience of the democratic process, and it is important for young people to witness the institutions that shape our country’s governance. Earlier this year, primary 5 pupils from Our Lady of Loretto primary school in Dalmuir, in my region, were denied that experience due to travel costs. Although Scottish schoolchildren can claim back 85 per cent of the travel expenses to visit their United Kingdom Parliament, the Scottish Parliament offers no financial assistance for travel. What consideration has the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body given to allowing a percentage of travel costs to be claimed back for school visits?

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

To give some context, in the school year that is just ending, the education service has supported more than 400 education establishments; welcomed 214 schools to Holyrood; visited 164 schools; and held online sessions for 59 schools. We have been in every constituency, with a good diversity of age ranges and education settings and reached into schools in areas of deprivation. We know the importance of the impact of visiting the Parliament, but travel is not the practical option or the highest priority for many schools, which is why we offer the digital and outreach services.

I hear, however, what the member has said about the UK Parliament, which the SPCB knows offers a travel subsidy based on distance from the building, starting at 30 miles. We are working with the UK Parliament to understand the impact that that subsidy has had on the profile of the schools that use the service. The policy intention that the SPCB will continue to address in the autumn is whether spending money on a travel subsidy will help to achieve our public engagement goals in the most effective way, in line with the Scotland Act 1998. We are still reviewing and considering the position.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what action it is taking to recognise pride month, including how it supports LGBTQ+ staff and visitors by ensuring that the Parliament remains a visibly inclusive environment. (S6O-03587)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

The corporate body recognises the benefits that a diverse workforce can bring and takes immense pride in the values and culture of this Parliament by providing a positive, inclusive working environment where LGBTQ+ inclusion is embedded in everything that we do. As an employer, the corporate body takes an intersectional approach to diversity and inclusion to address the on-going legacy of historic prejudice and the continuing barriers to full inclusion. We will work in partnership with the recognised trade unions and LGBTQ+ staff to ensure that Parliament remains a visibly inclusive environment.

Finally, the commitment to LGBTQ+ staff members, visitors and the public is long standing and non-negotiable. As in previous years, the corporate body this morning agreed to a request to fly the progress flag this year to mark pride day in Edinburgh.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I am delighted to hear about that decision regarding the progress pride flag.

I ask my question in the wake of the decision not so long ago to require Parliament staff not to wear rainbow lanyards—a decision that I regard as unnecessary and unhelpful. Members are still allowed to make that small, simple and utterly inoffensive gesture of inclusion and support. On the other hand, corporate body staff are not. Is the corporate body aware that, in the wake of that decision, some individuals who actively campaign against the equality and human rights of lesbian, gay, bi, trans and queer people actively welcomed the decision? Is the corporate body troubled by that and does it recognise that it has a responsibility assertively to challenge such suggestions and to use pride month to reassert very clearly the inclusive nature of Parliament?

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

On that latter point, I agree with Mr Harvie. I hope that he will accept that my personal record on these matters is such that I would not be a party to a decision that was trying to promote the kind of conclusive outcome that some people might be trying to come to as a result of the decision.

However, political parties have political views; the institution of the Parliament does not. The Parliament is welcome, open and accessible to all visitors—it is rated as a five-star visitor attraction by VisitScotland and, in an assessment in June 2023, it scored 10 out of 10 for inclusivity—but it is important that people who visit the Parliament feel that the Parliament itself is not expressing any particular kind of view. That was the reason why the corporate body came to the position that it did.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I can squeeze in question 8, if I could please have succinct questions and answers.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether a simplified employment process could be introduced for temporary staff working for just two or three days, for reasons such as covering sickness. (S6O-03581)

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I was caught off guard, Presiding Officer. I did not think that we would get to number 8.

The corporate body recognises that MSPs’ staffing requirements can fluctuate over time in response to a range of circumstances. The SPCB seeks to operate arrangements that meet MSPs’ needs, while ensuring that the provisions of the reimbursement of members’ expenses scheme are met and that MSPs carry out their responsibilities as employers in accordance with employment law requirements.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Sometimes, I employ somebody for just one or two days to cover, for example, a funeral, sickness, unexpected leave or jury duty. We are expected to have an 11-page contract issued and signed, which seems a little bit over the top.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

I note the point that Mr Mason makes. If it is possible for people services to be given advance notice of the potential arrival of a very short-term employee, it can facilitate a discussion with the member about how that might be progressed.

However, where, in effect, the individual has been employed and we are notified of that after the event, there is a requirement for us to abide by employment law provisions. I know that Mr Mason is an assiduous attacker of bureaucracy in those regards but, unfortunately, it is nonetheless a bureaucracy that is required as a result of the employment law by which we are bound.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body question time. I apologise to the one member who I was simply unable to squeeze in. I did my best to get us through as many questions as possible.

There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business, to allow front-bench teams to change position should they so wish.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is portfolio question time. The portfolio on this occasion is net zero and energy, and transport. As ever, members wishing to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government how it is informing tourists and other visitors of how to use roads across the Highlands and Islands safely. (S6O-03565)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

In 2019, Road Safety Scotland, Police Scotland and the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association developed a campaign targeting people who are not familiar with driving on the left. Leaflets, wristbands and windscreen stickers were provided to car rental companies to distribute to foreign drivers hiring vehicles at airports across Scotland. We also offer advice to motorcyclists, as well as to drivers of caravans and motorhomes.

In 2023, after Covid, the campaign was relaunched, and resources were made available in tourist centres, airports and ferry ports, supported by signs with various messages. The driver wristbands say, “Drive on the left” in nine languages, and clutch reservoir gaiters saying, “Ride on the left” in eight languages were produced for motorcyclists. A short animated video for drivers to view in advance of picking up their vehicles was also created. Orders for materials can be made for distribution this year.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The potential risks of tourists and others who are unfamiliar with the A9 using the road are well known. Across the Highlands and Islands, we are seeing a proliferation of motorhomes, many of which are driven by people with no experience of driving one, nor of the difficult and too often pothole-ridden roads that they are driving on.

In Orkney and Shetland, there has been an increase in the number of visitors touring the islands on e-bikes that are provided by the cruise ships that they have just come off. Many of those people will not have ridden one before, and they are using roads that are simply not suitable for large slow-moving groups of cyclists, who are often more focused on the scenery than on the road and other traffic. I have seen such groups, myself.

What concerns does the cabinet secretary have about the potential risks that those situations are creating? How can the Scottish Government support the police and local councils in addressing them?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Jamie Halcro Johnston has raised an important and serious issue in relation to unfamiliarity and different vehicles. The motorhomes that are being hired should be identified as a particular target for the campaign that I referred to.

On Jamie Halcro Johnston’s point about e-bikes, I note that ferry ports, as well as airports, are important exit points to destinations, so upping the profile of the issues and the “Drive on the left” campaign in those contexts is important. I am also aware that, on some Loganair flights—I might not be correct about the airline—there is an announcement about the issue to people who are leaving the aircraft. Raising of the campaign’s profile continues. We also support road safety through councils including Highland Council.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that it has spent nearly £6 million on consultants providing advice on the future of ferries. (S6O-03566)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

On complex and high-value projects, specialist advice is required to ensure that Scottish Government contracts fully meet policy objectives and legal requirements. That figure refers to work since 2015, which has included support from specialist technical, legal and financial external advisers, including those with expertise in the maritime sector, in their work both in Scotland and internationally. The work will help to ensure that we adhere to the relevant legislation, that we meet the needs of communities and that the appropriate ferries projects deliver value for money to the public purse.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

I understand that the latest award is of £250,000 to EY, but passengers and the workforce are in the dark as to what the work by consultants has achieved, to date. Will the cabinet secretary advise members on that and commit to a formal and regular structure of direct engagement with the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, the Transport Salaried Staffs Association and other CalMac Ferries unions on the case for a direct award? Will she outline the engagement that she is having with islanders? What more can be done to ensure that the voices of the workforce and islanders are heard in decisions about the future structure of our ferry services?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The short answer is that I do, they are and we will. We regularly engage with the unions. I have a regular session specifically with the ferry unions, and a direct award has been the subject of discussions with them. Just as important, if not more important, is the detail of that. The content of the next award has been the subject of direct engagement between Transport Scotland officials and the unions. Similarly, we will report on consultation of islanders on the next award.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

A number of members wish to ask supplementaries. I will try to get them all in, but they will need to brief, as will the responses.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I was pleased to see that the new MV Loch Indaal was launched at the weekend. I look forward to its entering service next year.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that we could make more progress and deliver more investment in essential infrastructure, including our ferry fleet, if Scotland’s capital budget had not been slashed by the Tories? Does she share my concern that, if Labour wins the election, far from providing more funds for Scotland, it will make further cuts that will hamper our ambition for ferries and other essential transport?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

In recent years, we have delivered record levels of funding for ferry services and improved infrastructure. It was great to see the Loch Indaal being launched at the weekend.

Our planned investment is set out in the islands connectivity plan and in the vessels and ports plan, but it relies on significant uplifts in budgets, particularly in relation to capital. We know that the United Kingdom Government’s spring budget fell far short of meeting Scotland’s needs. We also know, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, that Labour is planning to make cuts and that it would require cuts of up to £20 billion to be made by 2028.

We need the incoming UK Government to introduce an emergency budget to restore the £1.3 billion cut in Scotland’s capital budget.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Would the cabinet secretary agree to allow a briefing—a private briefing, if necessary—to be provided by First Marine International on the benchmarking study that it carried out on the Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Ltd shipyard and the investment that it would need to make it sufficiently competitive?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am not responsible for Ferguson Marine, but I will relay that question to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Gaelic, who has the key responsibility in that area.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

Has the Scottish Government hired consultants to look at the option of tunnels to replace ferries and, if it has, how much has been spent on that, to date?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Tunnels are part of the strategic transport projects review 2, and Beatrice Wishart will be aware that the Shetland task force is looking at various connectivity issues across the islands, including Shetland Islands Council ferry replacements and tunnels. There has been constructive engagement with the Shetland ferry replacement task force, which has been convened by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

In relation to the work by consultants that has been carried out for Shetland, we have agreed to look at any business development support that might be required in terms of planning. However, that is a broader answer to the specific question that Beatrice Wishart asked.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of any economic and social impact of there being no rail services between Ayr, Girvan and Stranraer since the line was closed in September 2023. (S6O-03567)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am very much aware of the impact that the closure of Ayr station has had on people who live and work in the area and travel to and from Ayr, Maybole, Girvan and Stranraer.

As Carol Mochan might be aware, the lead responsibility for Ayr station hotel rests with South Ayrshire Council, while Network Rail has responsibility for the railway station itself.

We share the concerns regarding the length of time that the works to secure the building have taken. That is due to the complex nature of the safety-related works which, as the investigative work developed, required that the southern extension and a large portion of the northern extension be demolished.

However, I am also pleased that, according to the latest advice from ScotRail, bus replacement services are operating well and that, from 17 June, ScotRail expects an Ayr to Glasgow electric service to be reinstated. I also understand that it is hoped that a full return to services, including to Maybole, Girvan, Barrhill and Stranraer, will be possible from mid-July.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I, too, welcome the news that we can expect services to resume in July. However, businesses and commuters in those towns and the surrounding areas have suffered as a result of the disruption. A big problem has been the lack of affordable and reliable bus routes to pick up the strain when such events occur. Since 2007, more than 1,200 bus routes have been lost in Scotland and, in real terms, the cost of bus travel has increased.

A recent report by the Institute for Public Policy Research, “Wheels of change: Promoting fair and green transport in rural Scotland”, has called on the Scottish Government to identify, fund and champion the anchor towns and communities that would provide public services and transport hubs for people who live in rural areas. What action has been taken in that regard?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I recognise that the fire that caused the disruption was not the responsibility of anybody but those who caused the fire, and that the consequences of that are being met by a load of different organisations.

Carol Mochan’s point about how we can help with having anchor towns in relation to public sector transport modal shift is an interesting segue from rail, but I get it. That—ensuring that we support modal hubs for buses and trains—is the main focus of the work that we are trying to do with our transport strategy.

We have a deregulated bus system. This Government brought in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 and the subsequent legislation to allow regional transport partnerships the choice to take different positions. However, as Carol Mochan will be aware, her party did not, when it was last in power, make any changes to the deregulated position, which means that there has to be partnership working with private bus companies, which are responsible for the vast majority of the services that are provided.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I will take a brief supplementary from Sharon Dowey.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

I also welcome the news that some rail services will return to Ayr station from 17 June, with services south to Maybole, Girvan and Stranraer expected to be operational in July.

The fire at Ayr station hotel has been devastating and has severely impacted local businesses and the community. Given that no service was in place for more than nine months, what measures can the Scottish Government take to encourage passengers back on to the tracks to visit towns in the south-west, thereby boosting the local economy?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I appreciate Sharon Dowey’s point, which was also raised by another member during First Minister’s question time. We currently have a discounted proposition with the removal of peak fares, which is to encourage people to use rail more generally, but Sharon Dowey makes the important point that we need to help in publicising and promoting the services in order to encourage more people to visit the south-west.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

To ask the Scottish Government how it works with local authorities to promote road safety. (S6O-03568)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We are supporting our commitment to make Scotland’s roads safe for all with a record £36 million investment in road safety in 2024-25 to reduce casualties and risks on our roads. That includes the road safety improvement fund, which each local authority can access to improve road safety on their networks.

The Scottish Government collaborates with all local authorities via our local partnership forums, which are part of the governance structure of the road safety framework to 2030, and various other road safety forums. Those forums give us the capability to improve communication between local and national levels.

Road Safety Scotland has developed a full suite of learning and resources for three to 18-year-olds, which is available on its website.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I frequently hear from constituents who are concerned about speeding across my Rutherglen constituency, including on Brownside Road in Cambuslang, which has seen numerous accidents over the years. However, more often than not, South Lanarkshire Council does not commit to implementing traffic calming measures.

Although prioritising areas for traffic calming is an operational matter for South Lanarkshire Council, can the cabinet secretary outline further how the Government engages with local authorities to ensure that they are doing what they can to improve road safety for pedestrians and other drivers?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Through our road safety framework to 2030 we aim to protect our vulnerable road users and achieve safer road travel in Scotland.

As I said in my initial answer, we engage local authorities through the local partnership forums and other road safety groups. Through the road safety improvement fund, we provide financial support as well as road collision data to allow local authorities to deliver evidence-led road safety initiatives to target overrepresented modes and users in their respective areas.

We also provide financial support for local authorities to deliver the 20mph speed limits as part of the national strategy.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

In May, I joined Living Streets, the United Kingdom charity for active travel that encourages children to walk through walk to school week.

Our roads are seen as too dangerous for many, with casualties on the roads increasing since 2020. Will the cabinet secretary outline what measures the Scottish Government is taking to increase road safety and promote active travel, and will she assure me that projects for Transport Scotland’s road safety framework will be fully funded until 2030?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Road safety is a big concern of mine, which is why we have that record level of funding in the road safety and improvement budget. I think that, in his question, the member is referring to local roads. I am responsible for trunk roads and councils will be responsible for local roads. However, his point about active travel incorporating safety measures is well made. I will make sure that, as we take forward our active travel plans, road safety is embedded as part and parcel of what we deliver.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its commitment to increase the number of electric vehicle charging points, particularly in rural areas. (S6O-03569)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government has invested more than £65 million in public EV charging since 2011. As a result of that and increasing private investment, Scotland has the best provision of public EV charging per head of any part of the United Kingdom except London, and the most rapid charge points of any part of the UK. We now have more than 5,000 public EV charging points and we are on target to hit 6,000 by 2026.

We are investing a further £30 million through our EV infrastructure fund and supporting local authorities to leverage private investment to continue to grow public EV charging, with funding specifically prioritising those areas of Scotland that are less likely to attract private investment in public charging points, including rural and island communities. Earlier this month, two EV infrastructure fund grants were issued to support continued growth of the public EV charging network across a number of local authority areas, and further grants are due to be issued during 2024.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The ability to use electric vehicles depends on the ability to access charging points, which are more likely to be found in urban areas. To support our rural households, will the Scottish Government consider off-grid wind or solar-powered charging points in rural areas to avoid overburdening the grid?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

That is an interesting point. I will ask my officials to look at what might be more self-sustaining in the provision of charging points. We welcome any innovative ideas on how we might roll out charging points all over Scotland, which is a big geographical area. For example, we have recently seen BT using green street cabinets as an innovative way of improving the range of charging points.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

Alongside the private sector, local authorities have a key role to play in continuing to grow the EV charging network, especially in the many rural areas of Scotland that might otherwise struggle to attract commercial investment. Can the cabinet secretary advise what the Scottish Government is doing to support councils to play their part?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We have a clear partnership with local authorities. We provide the EV charging infrastructure fund that I mentioned in my first answer. It is expected that, this year, Scotland will benefit from up to £15 million of private sector investment in public EV charging, and our £30 million EV infrastructure fund encourages local authorities to collaborate in order to develop the scale of opportunity that can attract commercial investment. That is really important in order to develop provision across the country and support the skills, expertise and resources that will be needed. Local authorities are key partners in that work.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

When I visited Mowi in Rosyth a few months ago, I saw that it was installing quite a number of EV chargers. It explained to me that it intends to continue that process and hopes to open the charging points to the public. Does the Government see employers as having a key role here? If so, is it speaking to employer organisations, particularly in rural Scotland?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

That point is well made. The range and extent of EVs and, therefore, people’s confidence in using them will depend on the charging network. Clearly, we want to encourage people to use public transport, but if people are still using cars to travel to work, particularly in more rural areas, it is important that employers can provide charging points. That, too, will be part of the programme, with private and public investment working together to create that extended reach.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government how it envisages that the recommendations of the second strategic transport projects review will benefit the people of the Highlands and Islands. (S6O-03570)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Government is committed to developing and maintaining a safe, resilient and sustainable transport network to connect our communities. STPR2 includes 37 recommendations, out of a total of 45, to improve connectivity for the people of the Highlands and Islands.

We are already investing in our ports and vessels for both the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services and the northern isles ferry services—the CHFS and NIFS networks. We are also enhancing active travel connections and we are improving the A83. In conjunction with other STPR2 recommendations, including an integrated transport plan for Fort William, those measures will collectively improve reliability, accessibility and travel choice for the Highlands and Islands.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Fast, easy train journeys can play a huge part in getting people and freight off the roads. Can the cabinet secretary speak to the potential for rail infrastructure improvements across my region, the Highlands and Islands, particularly for the Highland main line, given its potential to reduce traffic and freight on the A9, where heavy loads can cause frustration and slower journeys?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Phase 1 of the Highland main line improvement project was delivered back in 2012, and that increased services from nine to 11 trains. The main part of that project, phase 2, was completed in March 2019, at a cost of £57 million. That included upgrades at Aviemore and Pitlochry stations for signalling, along with the extension of the passing loop at Aviemore and the reconfiguration and extension of the platforms at Pitlochry, which enabled the simultaneous arrival of trains at both those stations.

There are currently no active enhancement projects on the Highland main line, but officials at Transport Scotland continue to revise its programmes of work against the priorities in the context of the available funding.