Scottish Parliament, 20 June 2024

279 contributions from 72 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it has taken to improve access to childminders. (S6O-03613)

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

Childminders are a hugely valued part of the early learning and childcare profession in Scotland, and we want more families to be able to access the unique benefits that they can offer.

We have been working hard with the Scottish Childminding Association on a new approach for the sector, and I am pleased to confirm that a three-year programme of childminder recruitment and retention was launched on 5 June. Backed by more than £1 million in Scottish Government funding, the programme for Scotland’s childminding future will be available in at least 16 local authority areas during its first year.

The programme will involve the SCMA in scaling up its already successful pilots, which include a £750 start-up grant and tailored support for new childminders, as well as more practical assistance for the existing workforce.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Childminders provide a vital service but often work alone. How will the Government ensure that childminders are supported and that childminding can be a sustainable career?

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

Evelyn Tweed is correct that, often, childminders run a business on their own, so it is important that they feel both supported and connected to others in the profession. The SCMA’s new programme will implement a range of further measures to help childminders with their workload and professional development, building on the diverse range of support that the association already provides. That will include more practical assistance to existing childminders; the piloting of a new mentoring scheme, which aims to reduce workplace isolation and create networks of support; and a trial of funded time off the floor, which will test models of funded time for childminders to undertake professional learning and networking activities.

From the feedback and engagement that I have had, I believe that those actions will help to ensure that childminding remains a valued, sustainable and fulfilling career choice.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

A few weeks ago, the Scottish Government announced plans to increase Scotland’s childminding workforce by 1,000. However, Scotland lost more than 2,500 childminders between 2012 and 2022. Does the minister accept that the plans do not really go far enough? How does the Government intend to replace 1,500 childminders as well as retain the current workforce, to fulfil the 1,140 hours of childcare flexibilities that were promised to Scottish parents?

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

The pilot is a really positive start. However, we know that we have more to do. As I previously said, childminders are a hugely valued part of our childcare sector, so we want them to feel valued and safe in their roles. The pilot will have valuable learning; we will see how successful it is—I am very positive about that; then we will take further actions, based on that learning.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Childminders are hugely valuable in our child services. What figure does the minister hope to get to for the childminding community by 2026-27, given that it is currently at 3,225 and, as previously stated, it was at 6,200 back in December 2012? What is the minister’s target?

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

We aim to increase the sector by 1,000 childminders. In the first year of our programme, the SCMA aims to recruit 250 new childminders. As I have said, that is a really positive start, with big aims. Childminders are a hugely valued part of our sector and I am very positive about the campaign and the pilot, and what those will bring for the sector.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its on-going work with local authorities, Police Scotland and other partners to tackle the reported increasing antisocial behaviour in town centres. (S6O-03614)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

We support Police Scotland and local authorities to continue to invest in prevention, early intervention and diversionary activities to reduce antisocial behaviour. They have a wide range of powers and are best placed to lead on addressing those issues.

In addition, an independent working group on antisocial behaviour is currently examining our strategic approach to the issue and is undertaking widespread engagement in order to deliver its report later this year. We have also provided local authorities with more than £600 million of additional revenue funding, while Police Scotland has received an increase of £92.7 million, despite difficult financial circumstances that are due to United Kingdom Government austerity.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

The minister will be aware of the problems that antisocial behaviour causes across the country, but I want to mention specific incidents that have occurred in parts of Barrhead, which is in my region, and in particular around the Asda supermarket there. When we debated the issue last year, other members put to the minister the challenges that such behaviour presents across the country, and particularly around supermarkets. I have been engaging with the various stakeholders. I noticed that the minister mentioned that the independent working group on antisocial behaviour will report later this year. Will she agree to meet me to give me an update on that work? Can she be any more specific on the timescale for the publication of the working group’s report?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I would be more than happy to meet Mr O’Kane. The timescale for publication of the work is the end of this year. We have seen an increase in antisocial behaviour in retail areas, and we are working on that. The member might also be interested to know that I have been visiting local authorities and seeing initiatives that operate around the whole of Scotland. I am looking to implement those and to provide good guidance to local authorities.

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

As the police are often the first line of response to incidents of antisocial behaviour, it is vital that policing continues to be a priority for the Scottish Government. With that in mind, will the minister provide further detail on the Scottish Government’s funding for policing to ensure that antisocial behaviour in communities continues to be fully addressed?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

Policing remains a Scottish Government priority. Despite the difficult financial circumstances that have been caused by the UK Government’s austerity policies, the Scottish budget for 2024-25 includes record total funding of £1.55 billion for the police, which, as I have just said, represents an increase of £92.7 million. That increase includes an additional £75.7 million in resource budget to protect and support front-line policing.

Decisions on the allocation of those resources, including those designed to tackle antisocial behaviour, are, quite properly, a matter for the chief constable, who is accountable to the Scottish Police Authority. When the 2024-25 budget was announced in December last year, Ms Farrell made it clear to the Criminal Justice Committee that

“The allocation is an important recognition of Police Scotland’s value and the contribution that policing makes to Scotland being a safe place to live and work, with historically low levels of crime.”—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 20 December 2023; c 2.]

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Although I welcome the provision of free bus travel for under-22s, one unintended consequence is that a minority of young people have abused the scheme to commit antisocial behaviour outside their home towns. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport has since told us that she has asked officials to consider whether temporary digital blocking measures could be used. Will the minister tell us what conversations she has had with the cabinet secretary? Will she also provide an update on whether such measures could be used to withdraw free travel from the minority of young people who commit antisocial behaviour across our towns?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I have had several conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport. We must remember that the vast majority of young people who travel by bus behave appropriately.

Although the Scottish Government can withdraw or suspend a travel card if a person

“knowingly allows”

it

“to be used by another person”,

the legislation that underpins the current scheme does not provide a clear mechanism for blocking of cards in response to allegations of antisocial behaviour. The Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 provides a wide range of measures for dealing with all antisocial behaviour, including dispersal orders, which can be considered by police, in consultation with the local authority, on an individual and temporary basis. Transport Scotland is also working closely with the bus industry to develop and implement any further measures that can be taken to deter antisocial behaviour.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it can provide further details of the progress that it has made regarding the delivery of a railway station in Winchburgh, including the date by which it anticipates the business case and cost will be finalised. (S6O-03615)

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

As Sue Webber will be aware, the proposal is included in the council’s development plan. It was always a developer-led proposal, and it is one that I welcome, as I note the MSP for the constituency, Fiona Hyslop, does, too. There have been calls for the Government to get involved because of a lack of progress in taking the project forward for various reasons. I am happy to respond to those calls by bringing the parties together, which will allow progress to happen.

In April, I met Winchburgh Developments, West Lothian Council and Network Rail to discuss how they can support progress towards the delivery of a station in Winchburgh. All parties agreed to several actions, and Transport Scotland officials are investigating the development of the business case. I am aware that the council has now written to the city region deal project office to explore opportunities through the funding process.

The Scottish Government remains committed to progressing the proposal, and it is supporting and encouraging the council and the developer to continue engaging with the Government on the matter.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank the minister for that response, and I remind him that no developer has ever led the delivery of a new station anywhere in Scotland.

The economic and environmental case for a train station at Winchburgh is undeniable. Passengers will save £2.4 million, and there will be £3.5 million of decongestion benefits. There will also be almost half a million fewer car journeys every year. The list goes on, as the minister acknowledged in his letter to Edward Mountain, the convener of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee.

There is keen interest in building a station at Winchburgh, and it remains of significant public interest. The next meeting is in five days. The people of Winchburgh deserve much more. Can we expect a positive announcement and significant progress to be made before we return to Parliament in September?

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

To correct what the member has just said, East Renfrewshire Council is acting as the lead proposer for Balgray station. The council has obtained the required funding through the successful application to the city region deal and transport officials have provided East Renfrewshire Council with strategic support for the development of the outline business case and the final business case process. It is not correct to say that a council cannot lead on such a programme.

The Winchburgh proposal is a developer-led programme. The Government will support it in every way that we can, but the local authority and the developer have to get around the table so that we can make progress.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support schools in rural communities. (S6O-03616)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Rural schools play an important role in our communities. In Scotland, there is a presumption against the closure of rural schools. When local authorities plan to close a school, they are required to undertake a thorough and lengthy consultation process, including demonstrating the educational benefit of the closure, considering the impact of the school closure on local community and school travel arrangements, and consulting the community on alternatives to closure. That process ensures that the impact of any decision is properly considered and that options are explored. No school closure decision should ever be taken lightly.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

The cabinet secretary wrote to me on 3 June to confirm that the most recent list of rural schools in Scotland showed that there were 21 mothballed primary schools, with Aberdeenshire Council and Highland Council having the most, with four in each area. That list was from 2021, which is now three years ago. In Aberdeenshire alone, I believe that there are now 14 mothballed primary schools, and 16 more are at risk, including Tullynessle and Logie Coldstone primary schools in my constituency. That is a clear betrayal of our rural communities. Does the minister have any idea how many primary schools are currently mothballed across Scotland? What will he do about it?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

We really need to admire the brass neck of the member in asking that question, given that Aberdeenshire Council is Tory controlled. Local authorities have responsibility for the school estate, and decisions on closures and mothballing of schools are for them to take. Ministers have the power to call in a local authority decision only when the closure of the school is permanent.

From the information about Tullynessle that we have been provided with thus far, that would not appear to constitute a permanent closure. However, my officials have written to the local authority to seek further information about its plans and to remind it of its responsibilities under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. I will write to the member about the numbers that he is seeking.

I go back to my earlier point about the absolute brass neck of Mr Burnett. If he is genuinely concerned and if he shares the concerns of local residents about the two school mothballings, as they are referred to, he might want to have a chat with some of his councillor colleagues in Aberdeenshire.

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

I am sure that the minister will welcome the progress on two new-build secondary schools in my constituency—Peebles high and Gala academy—which are due to be completed next year and are funded by the Scottish Government.

Does the minister agree that it is a massive burden on Scottish Borders Council’s budget that Borders secondary schools were built under public-private partnerships and the private finance initiative in 2009 by the then Tory-Liberal Democrat administration at an initial cost of £72 million but, by the end of the contract in 2039, they will have cost £258 million, and that we should never forget the punishing continuing costs of projects funded by PPP/PFI, which, thankfully, the Scottish Government ditched?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Scottish Government was pleased to announce in December 2020 that we would provide financial support to Scottish Borders Council for its priority projects—namely, Galashiels community campus and Peebles high school—through phase 2 of the joint £2 billion learning estate investment programme. As Christine Grahame rightly notes, that was not done through the discredited PFI scheme, which the public purse is still bearing the cost of and which limits the amount of money that we and, indeed, councils have to invest in front-line services. The toxic legacy of PFI is still being felt in Scotland, and Labour members should be ashamed of their party’s record in government.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the developing the young workforce programme in the Cowdenbeath constituency. (S6O-03617)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The developing the young workforce programme plays a crucial role in the delivery of the Scottish Government’s commitment to ensuring that school leavers are supported to achieve their potential. DYW school co-ordinators and regional groups, including the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland DYW regional group, which covers Fife, take the lead on planning and delivering tailored events to meet the needs of young people and employers, and they facilitate connections with a range of delivery partners.

The Scottish Government remains committed to the DYW programme, with £12.9 million being invested in 2024-25 to fund regional groups and school co-ordinators.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The minister will, of course, be aware that Fife has been a trailblazer in facilitating vocational training for young people, with Lochgelly high school, the Purvis Group and Babcock, among others, having played a pivotal role over the years. What can be done to embed the developing the young workforce programme throughout Scotland to ensure that all that can be done is being done to provide young people with a route into skilled and well-paid jobs?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I absolutely share Annabelle Ewing’s high regard for the work of DYW, whether that be in her Cowdenbeath constituency, across Fife or elsewhere in Scotland. I also agree entirely that there is more to do to embed DYW into our offering for young people as they consider their future career paths.

The nature of DYW provision can vary from local authority area to local authority area. That is why my officials are working with DYW to see how we might enhance its standing.

I have been clear that I see DYW as an important pillar of the improved wider careers offering that we are developing as we seek to furnish our young people with the fullest possible understanding of the options that they have at their disposal.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 6 has been withdrawn.

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

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies indicating that forecast United Kingdom Government tax and spending plans would be funded by reductions in public investment, what assessment it has made of the potential impact that any changes to Scotland’s block grant resulting from this would have on Scotland’s public finances. (S6O-03619)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As the Institute for Fiscal Studies has highlighted, whoever wins the election, unprotected budgets face cuts of up to £20 billion by 2028-29. We do not know what that means for our budget, as the IFS has pointed out that there is absolutely zero clarity from either the Conservatives or Labour about where those cuts might fall. However, decisions by the UK Government have already cost Scotland up to £1.6 billion in potential consequentials, and it is clear that any future UK Government will deliver more of the same for Scotland.

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

I am deeply concerned about the scale of the cuts that we face under the next UK Government. If a more realistic position is not taken by the leading Westminster parties, will the cabinet secretary call on her next UK counterpart to seriously consider the merits of Scotland’s more progressive system of income tax, which could, if applied across the rest of the UK, provide more than £15 billion in additional tax take for vital public services?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

We have repeatedly called on the UK Government to use the powers at its disposal to provide the funding that is needed to invest in our vital public services. Our own decisions on income tax since devolution will result in an additional £1.5 billion being raised in 2024-25 compared with what would have been raised if we had matched current policy in the rest of the UK. Ultimately, our position is that far greater powers over taxation should be devolved so that we can design a tax system that works for Scotland and allows us to raise the revenue that is needed to invest in vital public services.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Could the cabinet secretary outline what the IFS says about the gap in the Scottish National Party’s fiscal projections in its manifesto, which was launched yesterday, and how it intends to fill the £2 billion black hole in the Scottish Government’s financial plans that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has outlined?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Labour is on very dodgy ground indeed, given that it will not clarify whether it will continue with an austerity budget if it wins the election, which will mean that cuts of up to £20 billion will ensue by 2028-29. On top of that, the leader of the Scottish Labour Party has said that Labour will reverse the decisions that we have taken using our tax-raising powers in Scotland, which have raised £1.5 billion. If that reversal happens, we will have not only austerity cuts from Westminster but a double whammy of £1.5 billion less funding for vital public services. The public need to know about those Labour plans.

First Minister’s Question Time

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The oil and gas sector is vital for the north-east and for the whole of Scotland. The Rosebank energy development will create 1,600 jobs and will bring £6 billion of investment to the country. Why does John Swinney oppose that? (S6F-03240)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues in connection with the Rosebank oilfield have been the subject of a very active case, which is influenced by a decision in the Supreme Court today, so I will need to be careful about what I say in relation to the Rosebank development.

As Mr Ross will acknowledge, the Scottish Government believes that any new application for oil and gas developments has to have associated with it a very detailed and specific climate compatibility assessment, which should be undertaken to determine whether any such development can proceed in a fashion that is compatible with our journey to net zero. That is the approach that the Government believes should be taken.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

We are talking about 1,600 jobs, £6 billion of investment and a Scottish National Party First Minister who cannot welcome that and cannot support it, because the SNP opposes every single new oil and gas development in the North Sea.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

No.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Oh! We are hearing “No” from Kevin Stewart. I wonder whether John Swinney will be able to tell us which developments the Scottish Government supports.

Here is what some of John Swinney’s predecessors have said. Nicola Sturgeon, who John Swinney stood side by side with for decades, said that Rosebank was the

“greatest act of environmental vandalism”

in her lifetime. When the development was given the green light, Humza Yousaf said that it was “the wrong decision”. Just last week, John Swinney, speaking about new oil and gas licences, said that the granting of them was “utterly irresponsible”.

Why has SNP leader after SNP leader been against granting new oil and gas licences for the North Sea?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I think that one of the reasons why Douglas Ross is leaving the leadership of the Conservative Party—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

You don’t answer the questions—that’s why.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Oh, so Mr Ross—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

First Minister!

Mr Ross, we will not continue in such a manner. We must conduct our business in a courteous and respectful manner.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I suspect that one of the reasons why Douglas Ross is leaving the leadership of the Conservative Party is that he is not presenting an accurate picture of the remarks that I have made. [Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members, let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The specific remark that I made was that a commitment by the Prime Minister to undertake 100 new oil and gas licences without any scrutiny was climate change denial of the first order, and utterly and totally reckless. Those were my words, and I will not have them misrepresented by Douglas Ross.

We have a rational and considered process, which we have argued for, which is that every individual application should be subject to a climate compatibility assessment, because there is a journey that we as a country have to make to reach net zero. That is inescapable.

What is clear from the position that has been taken by the Prime Minister, which has been supported by Douglas Ross and the Conservatives, is that they do not care about the journey on climate; they are not interested in the crisis that we face with the climate emergency. The Scottish Government will take the responsible approach to managing the transition and the challenges of the climate emergency.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

What we have just heard from John Swinney—and his MSPs are applauding—is that he and the SNP do not care about tens of thousands of jobs in the north-east of Scotland. They do not care about the oil and gas sector, which is needed for our energy security now and going forward. When Rosebank and Cambo were approved—just as when any new development is approved—the SNP opposed it. The SNP opposes new oil and gas developments.

John Swinney did not seem to want to hear what the previous First Minister said, nor did he want to hear his own comments that new licences were “utterly irresponsible”. Let us hear from some of his current cabinet ministers. Màiri McAllan, the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy, said:

“we do not agree with the UK Government issuing new oil and gas licences.”—[Official Report, 22 November 2022; c 12.]

That is from the SNP Government’s energy secretary.

I have with me a letter that her predecessor, Neil Gray, the former energy secretary, wrote to climate activists. He said:

“We have long expressed our concern about Rosebank being given the go-ahead.”

Before that, Michael Matheson lodged a consultation on a presumption against new oil and gas licences. Why does SNP energy secretary after SNP energy secretary oppose new oil and gas licences, which are crucial to the Scottish energy sector?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I think that if Mr Ross were to look at the material that the Government has published and the process that we believe should be taken forward in a rational and considered way, he would find that the Government’s position is anchored around a number of principles. First, we have to assess the compatibility of any oil and gas licence application with the journey towards net zero, and a rigorous and thorough process must be undertaken around that. Secondly, in coming to that assessment, we must consider issues in relation to our energy security. Thirdly, we must take a responsible approach to managing the transition to net zero.

I am not going to stand here and be lectured by a leader of the Conservatives, whose party presided over the industrial devastation of central Scotland, the consequences of which we as a Government are still having to address. The Government will take a responsible approach to the management of the oil and gas sector and its transition to net zero, and we will take absolutely no lessons from the Conservatives.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I say to John Swinney that there is nothing rational or considered about turning your back on the Scottish oil and gas sector by claiming that you are against every oil and gas licence but being unable to say so, being unable to be truthful with the people of Scotland. The First Minister should just be honest: the SNP opposes every single new oil and gas licence being issued by the United Kingdom Government—that is the case. Whenever a new development is proposed in the North Sea, the SNP opposes it. It opposes every round of new licences that are granted for the oil and gas sector. In recent years, it has not supported any new fields—not one.

Whatever John Swinney is claiming today is only a temporary position for the SNP. Its position is very clear: it does not, and will not, stand up for Scotland’s oil and gas industry. It is willing to put tens of thousands of jobs and the north-east’s economy at risk. The Scottish Conservatives support Scotland’s oil and gas industry. Why does the SNP oppose it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am not sure that Douglas Ross is on his strongest ground—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

About oil and gas?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—in taking me to task about honesty.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Here is Honest John.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross, I ask you to apologise for that comment.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I apologise for calling the First Minister Honest John.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross, we are not going to continue like this. I ask you to reflect on your conduct.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not think that Douglas Ross is in a particularly strong position today to raise issues of honesty with me, when the Gambling Commission is investigating the alleged conduct of senior figures in the Conservative and Unionist Party. I think that Douglas Ross is on thin ground.

I also do not think that—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Sorry, First Minister.

Mr Ross, this is actually First Minister’s question time, when many members across the chamber wish to have an opportunity to put a question to the First Minister. I would like to make sure that that is possible for as many members as possible. In order to do that, we must conduct ourselves in a courteous and respectful manner.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I also do not think that Douglas Ross is on strong ground in attacking me about the rational and considered position that the Scottish Government is taking, when the Prime Minister is ignoring the climate emergency by sanctioning 100 oil and gas licences without any questions being asked. That is irresponsible. That is action that will accelerate the climate emergency.

This Government will take a rational and considered approach to oil and gas developments. We will also support the oil and gas sector to transition to the essential work that we need to undertake on renewables, because Scotland’s future lies as a green energy renewables powerhouse, and the Scottish Government is putting in place the measures to make that happen.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Our national health service faces a national crisis in what is known as corridor care, where patients are treated on trolleys in corridors because there are simply not enough beds in wards for them. This week, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine published a new analysis that found that, on average, 45 per cent of patients who were treated in our emergency departments did not have access to a private cubicle. In the RCEM’s words,

“when no cubicle is available, patients are treated in other areas: trolleys in corridors, cars, the waiting room, relative rooms, plaster rooms.”

I ask members to imagine themselves, or one of their loved ones, lying on a trolley for hours with no privacy and no dignity, just pain and distress. After 17 years of this Scottish National Party Government, why has corridor care become such a commonplace?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As Mr Sarwar will know, the issues and challenges in the national health service today are driven by a number of factors. One of them is the increase in demand in the aftermath of Covid, which the national health service is doing its level best to try to address.

We are wrestling also with the challenges of our hospitals being significantly congested because of the challenges around delayed discharge. Those challenges come largely from the fact that we do not have enough social care packages available in the community, because we do not have enough people in the workforce to deliver the volume of social care that is required. That is a consequence of the loss of population because of the loss of free movement under Brexit. The issues that we are wrestling with are significant and acute, and the Government and our health boards are focused on addressing that.

Finally, I say to Mr Sarwar that, if anybody is treated in the fashion that he has recounted and if anybody has that experience—I have seen media reports this morning of a particular case at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital—I apologise unreservedly to them, and I assure members of the public and their families that the Government is doing all that it can to address that circumstance.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I have been coming to the chamber week after week for the past three years, and week after week we have been hearing apologies from SNP First Ministers. We then get apologies the week after and the week after that, and nothing changes in people’s lived experience.

Let us be clear: long waits cost lives. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine has warned that, for every 72 patients who wait over eight hours in accident and emergency departments, there will be one excess death. That is a death that could have been avoided if the patient had been treated on time. That means that, so far this year, more than 1,000 Scots have died who could have been saved had they been treated on time. That is 1,000 avoidable deaths of people so far this year alone, and it is only June. Those are fathers and mothers, and sons and daughters, who died because they could not get their care on time. Why have those families been so badly let down by the SNP Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In my earlier answer, I set out some of the issues that are driving that particular situation and I will repeat them: the increase in demand after Covid; the congestion in our hospitals, which now have in excess of 95 per cent occupancy, which is far too high and should be about 10 per cent lower for ordinary activity; and the absence of adequate social care capacity in the community, because we do not have enough social care workers to deliver social care packages. That is the explanation of the problem.

Mr Sarwar says that he comes here week after week to raise these issues. I know that he does, and he gets these answers, but what is required is that we take action. This Government has taken the action of increasing tax on higher earners in order to boost investment in the national health service. The national health service would have had less money available to it if this Government had not taken the hard decisions on tax.

The general election gives us an opportunity to do something about this. We could encourage more people into the labour force, which would require us to reintroduce freedom of movement, so that people can come to work in this country, or encourage more investment and take more investment decisions, such as ending austerity. However, Mr Sarwar’s party is proposing no answer to these issues. In fact, it is proposing the reverse by saying that it will maintain Brexit and austerity. That is not good enough—it is time for the Labour Party to act.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

If that is the best answer that a politician who has been in power for 17 years can give, he has to take a serious look in the mirror. In fact, it was John Swinney, as finance secretary, who cut local government and social care budgets across the country, so perhaps he should reflect on his own record, because the reality is that patients and staff have been failed and let down by this SNP Government.

A few weeks ago, the Royal College of Nursing reported on this issue, and it quoted a Scottish nurse, who said:

“We don’t complain for ourselves but for the patient. There are no screens to go round the patient. So, if they are being bed bathed or need a bed pan, you have to take a patient out of their bed space and move them into a corridor, then move the extra patient into the bed space to use the bed pan. It’s time consuming, there is not enough space in the rooms. It’s undignified for the patient.”

That unbearable situation is unfair to patients and staff.

First Minister, can you explain directly to that heartbroken nurse why you and your Government continue to let them down so badly?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members should always speak through the chair.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have explained the challenge and the difficulty. The Government has taken the action of increasing taxation for higher earners in order to invest more in the national health service than would have been the case had we just passed on the consequentials from United Kingdom funding. We have taken the hard decisions, and there was, of course, a time when Mr Sarwar would have supported us, but he has now U-turned on that position. As a consequence of what he said on Tuesday, he wants to cut the money that is available to the public finances.

Mr Sarwar is shaking his head at me. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Sarwar obviously does not understand what he was saying at his press conference on Tuesday. The consequences of his stance will be to reduce public expenditure in Scotland. It is, quite simply, beyond credibility to come here and ask me to invest more money in the national health service, in order to tackle the issues that Mr Sarwar is concerned about, when he wants to cut public expenditure and any prospective incoming United Kingdom Government will also cut public expenditure.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

What about the nurse?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

My answer to that nurse is that we must have an end to austerity, and she will not get that from the Labour Government.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

In precisely that vein, the First Minister tried this week to present the Scottish National Party as the only party that is committed to ending the cuts and reversing austerity. Apart from changes to income tax, which have already been done in Scotland, thanks to pressure from the Greens, the only actual change that he proposed was to devolve taxes and not increase them. Scotland should have control over oil and gas windfall taxes, other corporate taxes, national insurance, fuel duty and VAT, but only if we use those powers to raise revenue. The only change that the First Minister proposed was a VAT cut. Does he agree with the Greens that reversing the cuts and providing the investment that the country so clearly needs can be done only by raising significant revenue from the super-rich, who are hoarding the country’s wealth?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There are two aspects to answering that question. The first is the actions of the Scottish Government, and Mr Harvie will be familiar with these points. We have taken a range of decisions to vary the tax position in Scotland and, in some circumstances, to ask higher earners to pay more in taxation where that is appropriate. The Government has set out its position and its fiscal approach to enable that to be the case.

There is then the debate about the forthcoming United Kingdom election. I set out my party’s position yesterday, and if the Presiding Officer will forgive me, I refer Mr Harvie to the contents of our manifesto, which sets out a number of tax and spending changes that we would make to enable the priorities that we set out to be afforded within the financial envelope that is available to us.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Before I call Mr Harvie, I remind members that the chamber is not the place to campaign for a UK general election.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Indeed, Presiding Officer.

The First Minister is right about the additional revenue from income tax as a result of the work that the Greens did to show how that could be done, but he presented no plans at all for a wealth tax. As I said, the Greens worked out the detail on progressive income tax for Scotland, so maybe the First Minister is relying on us once again to do the work for him. He supports our proposals for a wealth tax on the richest 1 per cent, which would raise at least £70 billion. The real problem for the First Minister is that, whichever party forms the next UK Government, it will still be committed to Tory fiscal rules and will still refuse to rejoin the European Union, which will cut off both sources of extra revenue that the First Minister is relying on.

When a new Labour chancellor inevitably imposes more austerity to keep Labour’s new billionaire backers happy, what will the First Minister do with the taxes that he does control? Will he go further to raise the funds that we need to stop more cuts in Scotland, and will he finally scrap the broken council tax system to let our councils raise the revenue that they need to protect their services?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There are obviously a lot of fiscal choices involved in Mr Harvie’s question. He knows me well enough to know that the budget does not get written from here randomly during question time on a Thursday afternoon. There will be a process of engagement across the parliamentary spectrum to enable that to be undertaken.

However, I agree with Mr Harvie that the conspiracy of silence that exists between the Conservative Party and the Labour Party to hide the £18 billion of cuts from the public is reprehensible. The one thing that must happen after the election that we face is an end to austerity. Our public services cannot cope with any more austerity and, unfortunately, the outcome of the United Kingdom general election—the election of either a Conservative or a Labour Government—will deliver more austerity. We need to use our votes effectively in the election to prevent that from happening.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on the call from the Federation of Small Businesses Scotland for the next United Kingdom Administration to pilot a remote visa to benefit remote areas such as the Highlands, in line with the Migration Advisory Committee recommendation, and any implications that this could have for Scotland’s economy. (S6F-03255)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The UK Government’s own Migration Advisory Committee described our rural visa pilot proposal as

“sensible and clear in both scale and deliverability”,

and it highlighted that it is in the UK Government’s interest to trial it. Despite that, and despite the harm that has been caused to our rural and island communities by a hard Brexit, the current United Kingdom Government refused to engage.

The business sector recognises those harms. It is therefore welcome that FSB Scotland is calling for a rural visa pilot, which recognises that businesses need to attract people to Scotland to contribute to our economy and communities. Our offer to the next United Kingdom Government is simple—work with us and with stakeholders across Scotland, which are calling in the strongest terms possible for that pilot to be delivered.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Scotland’s rural communities often face economic challenges for a range of reasons, and that has been exacerbated by a hard Tory Brexit. What is the First Minister’s latest assessment of the impact of Brexit on the population of rural Scotland and on the ability of businesses across Scotland that face acute workforce shortages to attract new employees? What is his response to the rejection of the European Commission’s offer of youth mobility for under-30s?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues that Clare Adamson puts to me are very real. Over the weekend and at the start of this week, I spent several days in the north-east, the Highlands, the north-west and our islands on the west coast. Everywhere that I went, I heard about the challenges of availability of population, which is at the heart of Clare Adamson’s questions.

The initiative that the European Commission took in proposing a youth mobility scheme is welcome. Such a scheme would be compatible with the Scottish Government’s openness to freedom of movement for individuals. It is a matter of record that the current United Kingdom Government has resisted addressing those issues. I hope that, after the election, there will be some opportunity to advance those issues, and I will constructively take them forward with an incoming United Kingdom Government. I intend to engage constructively on those questions so that we can find practical solutions to the issues that have been put to me by businesses.

In reference to the point that Mr Sarwar raised about the health service, one of the areas that face the greatest challenge in relation to delayed discharge is the Highlands. That challenge is about the availability of population in communities to deliver social care.

The issues that Clare Adamson puts to me are very important, and the Government will engage constructively to try to resolve them with an incoming United Kingdom Government.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what his response is to the reported comment from the Nuclear Industry Association that his stance on nuclear power is “hopelessly ideological and anti-science”. (S6F-03246)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government does not support the building of new nuclear power stations in Scotland. We have abundant natural resources and a highly skilled workforce that enables us to take advantage of the many renewable energy opportunities.

Evidence shows that new nuclear is more expensive than renewable alternatives. Nuclear energy also creates radioactive waste, which must be safely managed over many decades to protect the environment, and that requires complex and expensive handling. The Scottish Government is supporting continued growth in renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture technologies to drive economic growth, support green jobs and provide secure, affordable and clean energy for Scotland.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

So it is “hopelessly ideological and anti-science”.

Wind energy is available only 45 per cent of the time and it requires back-up from gas. In comparison, nuclear is available 90 per cent of the time and is therefore far more reliable. The First Minister’s anti-nuclear energy stance has seen gas consumption double since 2015, so we have to assume that he wants to follow the example of Germany, Austria and Belgium, whose carbon emissions have risen after the decommissioning of nuclear plants.

Last week, the GMB congress called for the Scottish Government to lift the ban. It has now invited Kate Forbes to meet nuclear workers at Hunterston. Will she go?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I gave Graham Simpson a considered answer. I do not think that it could in any way be described as ideological, because I made the point that evidence shows that new nuclear is more expensive than renewable alternatives. We are facing a cost of living and public finance crisis, so any responsible First Minister will look to make sure that we take the most fiscally efficient approach to energy generation.

This Government, as a result of its clear policy leadership, has successfully decarbonised electricity generation in Scotland. We have developed renewable energy with policy certainty. I want to give the same policy certainty to storage, to hydrogen and to carbon capture technologies, in order to drive economic growth and support green jobs.

What troubles me is that we have fabulous projects in Scotland—in, for example, carbon capture and technology, such as the Acorn project—and we have been led up the garden path by the Treasury and by United Kingdom ministers. I have lost count of the number of times, when I was a senior minister, that UK ministers promised me, face to face, an acceleration of the Acorn project. It has not happened.

I am afraid to say that Graham Simpson does not have a leg to stand on with that question. We have a clear strategy on renewables, and we will pursue it sustainably to deliver for the people of Scotland.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I fully support the First Minister’s stance regarding nuclear power. Has any MSP ever written to the Scottish Government to propose or support the building of nuclear power stations in their communities in areas that they represent?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am not personally aware of any such correspondence. However, it is important that we have a very clear strategy for the generation of electricity in our country. The Government is giving that policy certainty and I want to ensure that it is widely understood in Scotland.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what assurances the Scottish Government can provide to the arts and culture sector to ensure confidence, in light of the reported issues with the sponsorship of cultural events. (S6F-03260)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government recognises the valuable role that corporate and philanthropic giving plays in supporting the culture sector, and we are committed to working with all interested parties to help to restore the confidence that has been damaged in light of recent events. The Scottish Government has publicly called for dialogue and, crucially, has highlighted the damage that disinvestment campaigns are doing, which fundamentally undermines the sector and our world-class festivals, a number of which continue to receive significant amounts of public funding. Indeed, Scottish Government funding to the culture sector is increasing by £15.8 million in this financial year to £196.6 million, and we have also recently reaffirmed our commitment to investing at least £100 million more, annually, in culture and arts by the financial year 2028-29.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Many figures in Scotland’s culture sector are warning that the scale of their funding crisis cannot be overstated. There is a real need to shore up confidence in supporting cultural organisations so that they are targets for investment, not disinvestment. I backed calls from the sector for the Government to hold a festivals funding summit back in April, but the Government rejected that proposal. That position is surely now unsustainable. Will the First Minister convene an urgent meeting of private and philanthropic supporters to ensure on-going sponsorship of the arts and culture sector?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am very happy to engage on the point that Mr Bibby has raised. I welcome his question, because it provides me with the opportunity to say a bit more about the issue. I have been deeply concerned by the events that have taken place. I have spoken with the leadership of Baillie Gifford; I am concerned about the targeting of that company, because I welcome the philanthropic support that it provides to many organisations. I have reassured the company of the importance that I attach to its contribution to the economy. The disinvestment campaigns are misplaced; I do not think that they achieve their objectives; and they are now jeopardising really important cultural festivals that I know Mr Bibby and I value equally.

I will take away Mr Bibby’s proposal. I said in my original answer that the Government has publicly called for dialogue. Angus Robertson, who is the Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, has been engaging heavily on the question with a number of interested parties. However, if a further, more formal dialogue is required, I will consider that proposal and reply to Mr Bibby.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to general supplementaries and constituency questions.

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

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is aware of the concerns about cuts to the services of general practitioner practices in Penicuik, which the practices state are due in part to NHS Lothian’s increasing rental costs. As the First Minister will imagine, I have had many emails on the matter from concerned constituents. Has NHS Lothian taken into account the substantial increase in house building, and therefore in population, in Penicuik and the surrounding area?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will have to explore that particular point to determine whether that analysis has been undertaken. I understand the challenge that Christine Grahame has raised about the sharp rise in population in the Penicuik area, which is part of the particularly acute rise in population in general in the south-east of Scotland—particularly in West Lothian, Midlothian, East Lothian and the city of Edinburgh. That rise will place a strain on public infrastructure such as GP surgeries.

The issues relating to charges for premises and utilisation costs are a matter for negotiation between GP practices and health boards, but I will take away the specific point that Christine Grahame put to me in order to determine what analysis has been put in place to address the issue.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

The Scottish National Party awarded funding to River Garden, a rehabilitation centre in Auchincruive, to help 56 people recover from drug addiction, but that funding has been paused. Those financial constraints mean that the centre can currently accommodate only six people and that the future of the facility is now at risk, with fears that it may close within weeks.

Scotland has the worst rate of drug deaths in Europe, but beds are lying empty because funding has been frozen. Will the First Minister look at that immediately and sort it out?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is a very specific issue, so I cannot give Sharon Dowey a direct response today, but I will take that away and explore it.

My answer to a question from Mr Greene a few weeks ago indicated that we are on target to increase the number of beds available for rehabilitation services, according to the expectations of the national mission on drug deaths, so I am surprised to hear the information that Sharon Dowey has put to Parliament today, given that it is my expectation that we will achieve our published targets.

I will take that particular question away and explore the issue of River Garden.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Across Scotland, national health service and social care partnerships are facing a combined budget gap of almost £1.4 billion, which means that there will be severe cuts to social care services. In Glasgow, that will lead to cuts to community health services, cuts to the discharge and resettlement teams, cuts to care home nursing teams and the loss of 72 staff, including health visitors, nurses, allied health professionals and complex needs workers. Will the First Minister tell me why, if we all agree that we must increase support for primary care, his Government is doing the exact opposite in Glasgow and is cutting social services and staff?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is courageous questioning from Jackie Baillie. For some considerable time, I have been trying to set out to Parliament the enormous pressure on public finances. [Interruption.] If Jackie Baillie would stop interrupting me, we might make a little more progress.

Scotland faces a public spending crisis, but the Labour Party is proposing to continue that austerity. That is what is being proposed. [Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

This Government has taken hard decisions to increase the resources that are available for investment in public services. We have asked people with higher earnings to contribute more in taxation to enable us to invest more in the health service and in social care. That is what we have done. Jackie Baillie opposed that—she opposed every single bit of it.

There is now an opportunity, on 4 July, to elect a Government that could end austerity, but the Labour Party is not seizing the opportunity to end austerity—the Labour Party is going to prolong austerity. I gently suggest to Jackie Baillie that it would help the situation if the Labour Party committed itself to ending austerity and supported this Government’s agenda so that we could address the issues that she raises with me.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Analysis by the Nuffield Trust has indicated that both Labour’s and the Tories’ plans for the national health service would leave the health service with lower spending increases than those during the years of Tory austerity. [Interruption.] Does the First Minister agree that we should be prioritising additional investment in our NHS, not cutting it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

While Evelyn Tweed was asking her question, the source of her information—the Nuffield Trust—was being criticised by members in this Parliament. It is important that we all recognise that the Nuffield Trust, which is the source of the information that Evelyn Tweed put on the record, is a much-respected health commentary organisation. The trust has indicated that the proposals in the Labour and Conservative manifestos would result in lower increases in health spending than those during the worst years of Conservative austerity.

That means that there has been a missed opportunity to address the very issues that Jackie Baillie and Anas Sarwar have put to me today. We have to ensure that we have a realistic debate about investment in the health service. This Government has taken the hard decisions to increase tax on higher earners so that we can invest more in the national health service. I wish that other people would follow the example that we have shown about investment in the health service.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Last week, The Courier reported:

“A new parole hearing date has been confirmed for Angus killer Tasmin Glass as she seeks release from prison after serving only half her ten-year sentence ... Her case will now be considered by the Parole Board ... for a third time on July 26 ... the day before a memorial motorbike ride in honour of her victim Steven Donaldson ... A family spokesperson said: ‘The Parole Board ... has kept us waiting since February ... It has been a long and difficult wait for us ... with the Scottish parole board deferring the decision twice already ... The timing of the parole hearing is difficult for us.’”

The Courier ’s voice for victims campaign considers that the parole system retraumatises victims and needs greater transparency and communication between those who are involved. Does the First Minister agree? If so, what will he do about it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I express my sympathy to the family that is involved in this case—the Donaldson family. I am familiar with the case, given my representation of areas adjacent to those affected.

As Mr Kerr will know, the decisions that are taken by the Parole Board for Scotland are for the Parole Board and are independent of Government. He would not expect me to comment on the substance of them.

I accept Mr Kerr’s point that all aspects of our justice system must be trauma informed. Before my election as First Minister, I sat with colleagues on the Criminal Justice Committee hearing evidence about the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, which legislates in favour of trauma-informed practice in the justice system. I am very sympathetic to the importance of that point in every respect, and all aspects of the justice system must be trauma informed.

A range of measures are in place already. The bill prompts us to reconsider and review whether they are sufficient to address these challenges and questions. I give Mr Kerr the commitment that the Government will do that as we explore the bill’s provisions during its passage and determine whether any additional provisions are required to address the legitimate point that he puts to me.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

A constituent in Lothian has been diagnosed with prostate cancer and has been told that his tumour is growing. He is on an eight-month waiting list for surgery and has no idea when treatment will start. Public Health Scotland found that only 36.4 per cent of patients with prostate cancer received treatment within the Government’s target of 62 days, which is the lowest percentage for any major cancer type. Will the First Minister advise members what the Scottish Government is doing to bring down those unacceptable waiting times?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I am sorry that Mr Choudhury’s constituent is facing the anxiety that they are facing. If he wishes to share details of that particular case with me, I will have it examined to see whether there is anything that can be done to address it.

The Government has invested £70 million in the endoscopy and urology diagnostic plan, which includes a commitment to develop urology diagnostic hubs that are designed to speed up the treatment of cases of the type that Mr Choudhury puts to me. They will enable us to detect cancer earlier and faster and intervene at the earliest possible stage, which is crucial in cancer care.

I assure Mr Choudhury of the importance that the Government attaches to this important area of health service policy. If he cares to advise me about the individual case, I will see what can be done to address the issues that he puts to me.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

The latest purchasing managers index report from the Royal Bank of Scotland has shown that Scotland was a stand-out performer among the United Kingdom nations and regions last month, with private sector economic growth accelerating to the fastest pace in two years. What assessment has the First Minister and the Scottish Government made of the findings, and what steps is the Scottish Government taking to continue to help our economy to thrive?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I very much welcome the findings from the report, which signals a strengthening of private sector activity in Scotland. It confirms that that activity has expanded for the fifth month running and at the strongest pace in two years.

As Parliament will know, one of the four priorities of the Government is to strengthen the economy, and the Deputy First Minister is leading work, with my support, to advance that within Government. We are taking measures to build on the good work that has been done to encourage the start-up community and further investment is being provided in the scale-up community. We are seeing some of the fruits of that in the success of business, which underpins the very positive information in the purchasing managers index report.

I assure Mr MacDonald of the Government’s continued focus on ensuring that we strengthen economic growth and economic activity, because that is the foundation of good and strong public services in our country.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister has said that his biggest priority in government is to eradicate child poverty, yet, this morning, Scottish National Party and Green councillors in Glasgow voted to cut the celebrated MCR Pathways scheme by 50 per cent. Celebrated High Court judge Rita Rae has said that that will be a disaster and that it will bring people into the criminal justice system, while former director of education in Glasgow Maureen McKenna has said that it is inexplicable.

Members of my family take part in the MCR Pathways scheme. It is genuinely one of the best measures that we have ever developed to improve the lives of young people, get them out of harm’s way and give them life-changing opportunities. Surely the First Minister agrees that the proposed cut is a regressive, retrograde step. Will he do something to ensure that the MCR Pathways scheme is not cut but expanded, given that it is one of the most successful public policies that we have?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am very familiar with the work of MCR Pathways. I supported its introduction into public policy when I was the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, and I recognise the transformative effect that it can have on young people.

Decisions about the allocation of funding are matters for individual local authorities. The Government has given local government a record funding settlement of more than £14 billion for this financial year, which will have been allocated proportionately to Glasgow City Council.

I encourage members to look carefully and seriously at the work of MCR Pathways, recognising the benefits that it can deliver for young people around the country.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s question time. The next item of business is a members’ business debate in the name of Jamie Greene. There will be a short suspension to allow people who wish to leave the chamber and the gallery to do so.

West Coast Ferry Services

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I encourage those who are leaving the public gallery to do so as quickly and as quietly as possible.

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-13505, in the name of Jamie Greene, on west coast ferry disruption and replacement. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes with concern reports of a number of ongoing issues affecting CalMac ferry services on the west coast of Scotland ahead of the busy summer tourist season; further notes, in particular, reportedly ongoing problems with the MV Caledonian Isles, which were identified during its annual overhaul; understands that, as a result of the loss of the MV Caledonian Isles, the summer timetable for 2024 will be supported by two vessels rather than three as usual; further understands that this has led to a severe reduction in capacity for both passengers and vehicles on the route, as the MV Isle of Arran operates a core single vessel timetable on the Ardrossan-Brodick route; understands that damage to the Irish Berth at Ardrossan Harbour means that the MV Alfred can no longer operate out of Ardrossan, further reducing route capacity, and notes the calls on the berth’s owner, Peel Ports, to work with North Ayrshire Council, CalMac, CMAL and the Scottish Government to resolve any ongoing disputes surrounding port maintenance; considers that the Ardrossan-Brodick ferry is the busiest ferry route in Scotland, carrying 692,518 passengers in 2022; emphasises what it considers to be the importance of the tourism industry to Arran’s communities; notes the calls for all political parties to ensure that Ardrossan remains the principal port for the Arran route in the long term; understands that the MV Isle of Arran is 40 years old, whilst the MV Caledonian Isles is 31 years old; notes with concern the recently announced delays to the delivery of the Glen Sannox vessel to the route; understands that CalMac paid out £454,165 in 2022-23 in compensation to passengers for delays or cancellations, which was almost eight times the £57,822 paid out in 2017-18; further understands that, between 2017 and 2023, 6,302 sailings were cancelled due to technical issues; understands that the age and condition of CalMac’s vessels has led to a deficiency of spare capacity and resilience across the network; notes the calls for adequate and timely investment to boost the resilience of the fleet, including the commission of the small vessel replacement programme as soon as possible and a prompt resolution to the CHFS contract award that better meets the needs of island communities, and expresses sympathy with islanders who are affected most by disruption to sailings.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I repeat the Deputy Presiding Officer’s request that people leave quietly, because my voice is going and I do not want to have to shout.

I thank those members who signed my motion to allow this debate to take place. In seven days’ time, this Parliament will rise for summer recess, and our ability to publicly hold ministers to account will be vastly diminished until September. However, for our constituents, life goes on. For the next two months, it will be peak season for Scottish tourism and Scotland’s island communities, so I make absolutely no apology for using one of our final members’ business debates before recess to discuss the issue of ferries. While we on the mainland will complain about traffic jams as we go about our summer business, our islanders would be grateful for the luxury of slow-moving contraflows.

We can never overestimate the disruption that comes with cancelled ferries, which is why, for many years, I and so many others have relentlessly campaigned on the issue in this Parliament. Since I was first elected, I have asked 115 questions on ferries and have made 180 contributions on that subject in the chamber or in committee. It is astonishing that, nearly a decade on, many of the problems that we debated back when I was first elected are still not resolved; in many ways, they are even worse.

None of that is the fault of islanders, who are beleaguered and have long since lost trust in the Government to fix their ferry services. Neither is it the fault of CalMac Ferries staff, who are part of the fabric of the communities that they sail between and that they serve day in, day out.

The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers was absolutely right in its submission: abuse of staff on any scale is simply unacceptable. Our ports and the communities around them are the beating hearts of the islands that they serve. Tourists come and go; residents commute to and fro; goods, cattle and produce are exported and imported. CalMac itself, as a ferry operator, has been dealt its hand in this awful game of maritime Jenga because of its ever-ageing fleet, the slow replacement of new vessels, an exploding maintenance bill, stiflingly prescriptive routes and a lack of investment in our port infrastructure.

As far back as 2016, when I joined the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee—as it was then—we as a committee blew up the very notion that the status quo back then was delivering value for money or reliable services. The unholy triangle that was created between CalMac, Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd and Transport Scotland, and the intertwining lines of responsibility between those bodies and ministers, simply laid bare the reality that Scotland’s lifeline ferry services were being governed by the most complicated and unproductive quango quagmire in Scottish public body history. At the time, ministers vaguely accepted that damning indictment, and vaguely promised that they would fix those problems—so much so that they introduced the ironically named Islands (Scotland) Bill, which was supposed to put at the centre of public policy the needs of our island communities.

For the past eight years, islanders have lost faith in not just their local politicians but the entire political system. As the old ditty says:

“No man is an island.”

Well, he is if he is stuck on Arran and his ferry has been cancelled.

Here we are, in mid-2024, and this is the reality. For 2017, the vessel maintenance bill was £20 million. Last year, it was more than £42 million. In 2017, £58,000 was paid out in compensation to passengers—fair enough. Last year, that figure topped—wait for it—£0.5 million. That is a tenfold increase. Over the same period, 6,000 sailings have been cancelled for technical reasons alone—nothing to do with our notoriously fickle Scottish weather.

Our islanders do not expect much. They do not expect miracles on high seas and in high winds. They just want things to work when they are supposed to. Is that too much to ask?

Of course, the two new flagship ferries that we desperately await, which should have cost £100 million on an apparently fixed-price contract, now sit at a cost of nearly four times that. If we consider the written-off loans, the fat-cat pay-offs and the consultancy fees, that cost might hit nearly £0.5 billion—for just two ferries. To be honest, I think that 10 small ferries could have been got for the same price. Perhaps the Government, which permanently pleads the poverty of the public purse, might reflect on that.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Does Jamie Greene recognise that, as well as the issues with CalMac, there is a ticking time bomb of ferry replacement needs in ferry fleets right across Scotland, including a lot of internal ferry fleets such as in Orkney and Shetland, and that it will cost billions to replace them all?

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

As I said, the maintenance bill is on the increase. There are ferries scooting about our waters that are older than me, which is saying something.

What about the contracts that operate those services? Let us look at the west coast ferry contract. That contract was due for renewal in September this year, but it will not be renewed until perhaps September next year, although it seems to be endlessly delayed under the smokescreen of what I think is nearly a decade-old argument over the state aid rules on whether it can be awarded direct—yet, we still have no decision and no clarification.

I do not now have a personal view on the direct award. I used to, because I always thought that a competitive public procurement exercise would deliver value for money and bring out the best in the incumbent. The last time that CalMac was awarded that contract, it made 350 specific improvement commitments to our island communities, which was admirable. However, I then learned that Transport Scotland did not track progress on any of those. Many of them are yet to be delivered, which is probably not the fault of CalMac, either. Therefore I say to the minister that, before we hand the next contract to CalMac on a plate, we should be realistic about what it can deliver, given its ever-ageing fleet and crumbling ports.

And we wonder why CalMac’s chief executive left. Coming into his job must have been much like becoming the boss of a new airline, only to discover that the aeroplane manufacturer cannot deliver new aircraft, the maintenance workers cannot source any parts, the airports cannot look after the runways, and the Government will force routes and prices on the airline. In any other sector that would be a recipe for disaster. Private operators such as Western Ferries can deliver reliable and cost-effective routes to, for example, Dunoon, at no cost to the public purse, but we cannot get a reliable service to Cumbrae, which involves a journey so short that even I could swim it on a good day—perhaps.

We expect our islanders to say, “Ah, well. It is what it is. That is island life.” However, we should make no bones about it: our islands are suffering. Passenger numbers on the Ardrossan to Arran route have plummeted by 150,000 journeys in three years. North Ayrshire Council tells us that ferry problems cost businesses £170,000 per day in lost revenue. One business has reported losing nearly £500,000—that is the lost revenue of just one business, on just one island, when there are ferry problems. Let me clear, though, that our islands are open for business, because back benchers will accuse many of us of scaremongering by simply stating the reality of those facts. However, the financial and social costs of such disruptions are real.

Since I first took my oath in the Parliament we have had seven transport ministers and three First Ministers. We have had countless damning reports and audits of endless and very public failures. There have been lots of words, and lots of apologies, but there has not been enough listening. That is down to the Government’s failure to deliver a robust, reliable and long-term plan for our islands. It is by far the single biggest failure of duty towards our islands. I take no pleasure in saying that, and I make no apologies for bringing the matter to Parliament again.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We move to the open debate.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I congratulate Jamie Greene on securing the debate.

There are

“parts of the media—and the opposition parties—who can’t find a good word to say about the ferries in order to attack the Government, before loudly proclaiming how awful it is that confidence in the service is being lost and that island communities are suffering as a result.”

Those are the words of Tiree-based columnist Rhoda Meek, in a recent article that called attention to people relentlessly attacking the Scottish Government and CalMac over ferries and then expressing surprise about potential island visitors losing confidence and island businesses being damaged.

As an MSP who represents island communities in Arran and Cumbrae, I have hardly been shy about criticising CalMac, the Scottish Government and Transport Scotland when it has been appropriate to do so. However, today’s obviously party-political motion, which was lodged a fortnight after the Prime Minister announced a general election, fools no one.

For the avoidance of doubt, we should not pretend that there are no issues with our ferry network. We need a more island-centred, island-based perspective on such issues. However, we also need to acknowledge the hard work and commitment of CalMac staff, who operate in difficult circumstances, and the incredible work that they do on behalf of passengers, whether they be islanders or visitors to the islands.

I come back to the motion’s mention of Opposition parties. I note that, last week, Mr Greene complained that no Scottish National Party MSP had signed his motion, which is laughable given that Tory members have a policy of refusing to support SNP members’ motions. Mr Greene’s motion introduces absolutely nothing new, and it even makes reference to having this debate

“ahead of the busy summer ... season”

when we are already in that season.

The Arran and Cumbrae economies rely heavily on tourism. Any politician who today proclaims that chaos and disarray exist in the network does so in the clear knowledge that they will undermine the confidence of the visitors on whom those economies rely. There should be a very good reason for their doing so.

The motion refers to the MV Caledonian Isles being out of action until August and to delays to the delivery of the MV Glen Sannox. Those issues have been known about for months. It also mentions

“damage to the Irish Berth at Ardrossan Harbour”.

Not only was that situation announced in February, but the motion’s wording implicitly accepts the ridiculous notion that Peel Ports put forward, which was that the berth’s closure had been caused by CalMac vessels overusing it, as opposed to its own failure to maintain the harbour adequately. In the words of CalMac’s then CEO, Robbie Drummond,

“It’s a berth. That’s what it’s for.”

I appreciate that Mr Greene might not be on top of stakeholder opinion, but why bring a debate to the chamber to bring up long-standing fare issues during the summer season?

The motion’s call for Ardrossan to remain the principal port for Arran helps to guide us towards a motivation other than perceived political advantage, because we were set for a decision on the future of Ardrossan harbour two weeks ago. By calling a snap election, Mr Greene’s party ensured that an announcement was blocked, thanks to the purdah rules imposed on Scottish Government announcements. Deliberations took place on the very day that Mr Greene circulated his motion.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

If I can have the time back, I am more than happy to take an intervention.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

There were two reasons why I lodged this motion for debate in this Parliament—first, because the Government has not and, secondly, because Mr Gibson does not have the backbone to.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

That is absolutely pitiful. I was raising issues against my own Government as necessary long before you were even elected as a list member. When were you even last in Arran?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Speak through the chair, Mr Gibson.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

The fleet has issues. It is ageing and it lacks resilience. Community involvement and engagement are at an all-time low. Arran has borne the brunt of the latest round of disruption, while Cumbrae has had to endure a series of technical faults with vessels serving on the Millport to Largs route. A decision on the small vessel replacement programme cannot come quickly enough, but, sadly, today’s debate has nothing to do with a desire to solve any of those issues. It is about a press release from Mr Greene and attacking the Scottish Government and CalMac.

The Tories have been opportunistic on this for years. They mentioned ferries in only two of their first four Holyrood manifestos, one of which called for a budget cut for ferries. If we look at what is happening where they are in power, we should perhaps think about the RMV Scillonian III, which has been waiting for a replacement for many years. It was built in 1977, so it is eight years older than any Scottish ferry, but the Tories refuse to replace it in one of their own constituencies.

It is disappointing that this overtly partisan debate has been brought to the chamber, but those of us who represent and visit our island communities regularly and speak to stakeholders will certainly do our very best for our constituents. This motion is politics at its most base and cynical level, and I have little choice but to call it out as such.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

I congratulate Jamie Greene on securing the debate, and I was pleased to sign the motion to give cross-party support to enable the debate to take place. I believe that our constituents think that it is appropriate that we debate these issues before the summer recess.

I, too, am a West Scotland list MSP, I was the MP for North Ayrshire and Arran between 2005 and 2015 and I currently work out of a regional office in Ardrossan, just a few hundred yards from the Ardrossan ferry port. I have therefore represented the islands of Cumbrae and Arran for a number of years and, like other members, I receive regular representations about the ferry service.

It is clear that the problems on the ferry routes have increased significantly in recent years, which has had a massive impact on the lives of islanders, the island economies and, indeed, island tourism. Scottish Labour research found that the number of non-weather-related cancellations trebled in just five years by 237 per cent. CalMac cancelled 1,301 sailings in 2022, which represented an increase of 44 per cent since 2018. There is no doubt about the scale of the problem. Between 2015 and 2023, 6,302 sailings were cancelled for specific technical reasons. The average age of the 37 vessels that are leased to CalMac is 24 years.

There should be consensus across the chamber that we face a significant crisis and that we have to find solutions, ideally on a cross-party basis. Last year, the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee reported high levels of dissatisfaction among users. Issues that were cited included missed school hours, disrupted attendance at medical appointments, the inability to care for ill relatives and friends, cancelled holidays and a range of other problems.

All of us have received representations about things such as bare shelves in supermarkets on Arran over the festive period and representations from constituents outside Arran and Cumbrae about the impact of that on people who holiday on the islands.

The Arran route from Ardrossan is, of course, the busiest route on the network, and its future is currently under threat. The Ardrossan route has been the main route to Arran for 190 years, as it is the shortest, quickest and most convenient route, and transport and infrastructure have developed around it. Therefore, there is strong support for maintaining Ardrossan as the main port for Arran, but the poor condition of the port, particularly the Irish berth, is already causing significant problems. Peel Ports’s closure of the port means that the MV Alfred can operate only from Troon. That leaves the 40-year-old MV Isle of Arran serving the route from Ardrossan.

On the Largs to Cumbrae route, the normal vessel—the MV Loch Shira—has been out of service since April, and a succession of vessels have served the route. Construction will not start on a replacement vessel for that route until 2026. I hope that the Glen Sannox will come into service soon, because it is clear that that will have a massive impact. However, crewing levels and cabin space have still not been agreed with the relevant trade unions, and the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers is raising concerns. Given all the other problems that we have had with those issues, I urge the cabinet secretary to ensure that that is addressed and that there is an agreement on staffing levels as a matter of urgency.

Scottish Labour supports a direct award to provide long-term certainty for islanders and the workforce. We urge the Government to include trade unions, including the RMT, in its due diligence in delivering a long-term contract to CalMac. Tendering will not take place within the 12-month framework that the extension provides. We need certainty so that we can focus on the service that islanders receive and ensure that we have a robust and reliable service in the future that will, I hope, be operated in a way that genuinely provides the cross-party support that we need for such services.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I, too, congratulate Jamie Greene on securing this debate. His motion is one of the longest that I have ever read—it would take me nearly three minutes to read it out. I think that I need to give him a lesson on how to make a point succinctly.

To answer what Kenneth Gibson said, it is perfectly in order for any member to lodge a motion of this nature. In Jamie Greene’s case, the motion is of local interest. We can also lodge motions of national interest.

Jamie Greene has raised a number of important points about the reliability of ferries in his patch and the future of Ardrossan as the port for the Arran service. On reliability, the issue of the age of the CalMac fleet has been well rehearsed, as has the issue of the age of ferries elsewhere, as Jamie Halcro Johnston mentioned.

Goodness knows when we will see the two ferries that are being built at the Ferguson yard enter service. The complexity of the build and the fact that they have to use liquefied natural gas as well as diesel have no doubt contributed to delays and costs. The SNP’s green credentials are shattered by the insistence on having a greenhouse gas-emitting fuel that has to be shipped in from Europe and brought up here by road from the south coast. Why ferries that cannot fit into Ardrossan were ordered without any agreement in place to make the harbour ready for them is beyond comprehension.

I see no prospect of Ardrossan being used any time soon. Having listened to Kenneth Gibson, I hope that I am proved wrong and that there is some announcement after the election. I think that the islanders of Arran and anyone who wants to get there had better get used to going to and from Troon, where there has been investment, and I think that most people understand that.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Does Mr Simpson agree that we need to consider every port in moving forward with the ferries, to ensure that the infrastructure is in place for the fleet of smaller vessels, which will be electric? We have to ensure that the infrastructure is in place. Otherwise, we will keep having these problems.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I can give you the time back, Mr Simpson.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I thank Alex Rowley for making that intervention, as he is absolutely right. When we order those small ferries, we would hope that they will be electric. I think that that is the plan. Clearly, the ports have to be ready for that. Alex Rowley is quite correct.

The cabinet secretary will say, I am sure, that we have six ferries on their way. That is true, and it is to be welcomed. Those include the two Ferguson ones and the four that are being built, on time and on budget, in Turkey. They will provide greater reliance for the CalMac fleet, and we will get even more when the order for the seven small ferries is placed. There needs to be a decision on that as soon as the general election campaign is over. In fact, I think that that should have happened before now. Whoever gets that contract—it could go to more than one yard, of course—needs to be able to build the vessels on time and to deliver value for money for islanders.

The Ferguson yard is better placed to build smaller vessels than larger ones, but it requires investment. The former chief executive officer David Tydeman was very clear about that before he was sacked for doing his job. We are yet to hear what the so-called performance issues were that he was accused of by the board chairman—formerly of the massively successful Prestwick airport. The truth will out one day.

Anyway, when I attended the Ferguson’s summit in Greenock with Kate Forbes and others, we were very clear that a decision on that investment needed to be taken within days. It is now over a month later, and nothing has happened, so Ms Forbes and Ms Hyslop need to have their ducks in a row and be ready to work with the rest of us on the two key decisions that I have outlined within the next month.

Jamie Greene is right to raise the issues that he has raised today. I hope that the islanders he represents—and those he does not represent—start to see a better service soon, as they have been let down for too long.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

I thank my colleagues for raising the on-going issues with CalMac ferry services, and I thank Jamie Greene for securing the debate.

Some of the speeches that we have heard lay bare the consequences of decades of underinvestment and short-term thinking when it comes to our lifeline ferry networks. Our island communities are not just bustling tourist attractions; they are living, breathing communities whose very existence relies on resilient ferry connections. Every cancelled sailing disrupts lives, with missed medical appointments, unstocked shelves and workers unable to reach their jobs. This summer’s capacity reductions are unacceptable.

My constituents in the Highlands and Islands know all too well that the present crisis has been years in the making. The age of our vessels is not just a number; it is a reflection of our commitment to those who rely on our maritime arteries. The MV Isle of Arran is 40 years old, and the Maid of Glencoul, one of the vessels operating the Corran ferry in my region, which is the busiest ferry route in Scotland, will celebrate its golden anniversary in just two years. Although 48 years of service is a credit to the skill of the Clyde shipyard workers and the durability of their work, I am sure that no one in 1976 imagined that their vessel would still be operating in 2024.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

That was a very good point about the Maid of Glencoul and the MV Corran. It is not just island communities that are affected; it is also areas such as the Ardnamurchan peninsula that are suffering. I was there only last weekend, and there were people talking about moving out, so I am pleased that the member made that point.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I can give you the time back, Ms Burgess.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the member for concurring with that.

Those ageing vessels frequently break down, leading to more than 6,000 cancelled sailings since 2017, due to technical faults alone. CalMac had to pay out more than £450,000 last year in passenger compensation, which is eight times the 2017 level. Although the sums involved are a testament to the resilience of our people, they underscore the pressing need for a fleet that can weather the storms of technical issues and climate change.

A fundamental shift is required in order to build resilience and undo the damage of years of neglect. Our weather is getting stormier—a situation that will worsen as climate change begins to bed in—so we need to build climate adaptation into our island transport planning. Farmers, for example, need a ferry booking system that has an alert that lets them know in advance if a ferry is not sailing. Too often, farmers show up with their livestock only to find that they have to turn around and go home. A simple text notification system that communicated information on the morning of the sailing would reduce stress and wasted time for farmers.

It is time for us to chart a course in which the resilience of our fleet matches the indomitable spirit of our communities. The Scottish Green Party has consistently called for investment in low-carbon ferries and in fixed links to future proof our island transport. We need an accelerated small vessel replacement programme to deliver ferries that meet community needs, not just those of tourists. Many communities have their own answers for how to resolve the situation, from significant investment in fixed links to more small-scale adjustments, such as reduced fares and more reserved slots for islanders. They understand the potential of improved ferry connections to boost our island economies, reverse depopulation and build a resilient sustainable transport network that is befitting of a thriving island nation. Another summer of disruption must be a wake-up call.

I share the concerns that have been expressed by colleagues and the RMT that the motion ignores the role of workers in delivering lifeline ferry services in the west of Scotland, which have been compromised by the procurement failures of successive governments. The Scottish Greens will work constructively with all parties—CalMac, trade unions and communities—to design the long-term solutions that our islanders desperately need.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I invite Fiona Hyslop to respond to the debate.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I start by expressing my thanks to the CalMac crew and front-line staff for their work in delivering lifeline services across the network. As the First Minister noted last week, CalMac is a key part of the maritime fabric of the west coast of Scotland. I add my personal thanks to MV Isle of Arran’s master and crew for their speedy and professional response during the recent incident when a passenger fell overboard as a vessel approached Ardrossan.

I also thank Jamie Greene for securing this important debate. I agree with Graham Simpson and Kenny Gibson that the points that have been raised in the debate have been well rehearsed, but it gives me an opportunity to share with the Parliament as much as I can in the current circumstances. Jamie Halcro Johnston and Ariane Burgess raised issues about council-run ferries, which are not the subject of the motion, so I will focus on west coast ferries.

Scottish ministers accept that, on a number of routes, including the Arran route, communities are not getting the service and capacity that they deserve. That is why we are focused on improving the way that we deliver those services. That includes investment in new tonnage, with six new major vessels due by 2026, and a focus on improved community voice through our intent to directly award the next Clyde and Hebrides ferry services contract to CalMac. I fully understand and appreciate how much the Arran community and economy rely on the ferry service. We are working hard to make improvements and to address the current challenges. I welcome the input and on-going work of the Arran ferry committee in representing the island on ferry issues.

However, it is essential to reiterate the message that Arran is open for business, and encourage people, including foot passengers, to plan and book ahead in order to allow travel on their required sailing, particularly at peak times. I urge people to explore all options that are currently available for travelling to and from Arran, which include the Ardrossan or Troon to Brodick route, as well as the Claonaig to Lochranza route. I have been assured by CalMac that the MV Caledonian Isles is expected to return to service in August, and that the return-to-service date will be announced in due course.

Meanwhile, to support Arran and to provide much-needed capacity at this busy time, Scottish ministers have provided funding for the charter of the MV Alfred, including additional funding to secure extra crew and allow the vessel’s full capacity to be used. Although that still means that there will be a reduced available passenger and vehicle deck capacity, we continue to look at options to make further improvements. That includes planned work by CalMac to allow MV Alfred to take an increased range of vehicle types, maximising services on the secondary route from Lochranza to Claonaig, and work by CMAL, Argyll and Bute Council and other partners to explore possible improvements on the slickway to assist vehicle movement. Although the current situation is far from ideal, I hope that Mr Greene can recognise our efforts to support Arran’s connectivity while MV Caledonian Isles is receiving its extensive repairs.

With regard to Ardrossan port, we have been progressing the Ardrossan business case and cost exercise, and I have met Arran stakeholders as well as convening a task force meeting. At that meeting, members, including Kenneth Gibson MSP, shared their views on the ferry service, making the case for remaining at Ardrossan and for a decision on that to be taken as soon as possible. I assure colleagues that the business case is substantially complete, and Transport Scotland is working with funding partners to finalise it. We do not anticipate an announcement on the project until after the pre-election period.

During my visits and meetings with island communities, they made it clear to me that they—rightly—have high expectations of transport services to meet their transport connectivity needs. The most immediate priority is to ensure that we have reliable and resilient ferry fleets, and that is clear in the draft islands connectivity plan and reflected in the feedback to the public consultation, which recently closed.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Does the cabinet secretary consider that there may be an extension, or has any extension been considered, for the MV Alfred, given that it has been taken off its normal route in Orkney?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

With regard to considerations, those discussions will take place between CalMac and the owners of MV Alfred and will include reflection on capacity needs, capability and the return of MV Caledonian Isles.

I can assure members that the Government will take all issues very seriously. With regard to MV Alfred and MV Arrow, we have provided additional resilience and capacity across the network to date.

Members will know that the two new vessels, MV Glen Sannox and MV Glen Rosa, have been secured for the Arran community, and that on 31 May, the new interim CEO of Ferguson Marine updated Parliament on progress with the vessels.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Very briefly.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Would the cabinet secretary be willing to look at the issues that the RMT is raising in relation to crewing levels on the Glen Sannox and the issue of due diligence in relation to the direct award?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I will give you the time back, cabinet secretary.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have already said in an answer in the chamber that I meet regularly the ferry unions and they have direct input in relation to the award. They raised the issue of crewing levels some time back, and I know that Transport Scotland will make sure that, in preparing for the roll-out of the new ferries, that issue will be addressed.

Consideration of the business case and the procurement approach for the small vessel replacement programme is on-going. Due to the pre-election guidance, we will not be able to make any announcement on the SVRP before early July. We recognise the importance of that project and will—as Mr Simpson requested—confirm the position as soon as possible.

The motion mentions the new Clyde and Hebrides ferry service contract. I refer members to the answer that was given to the Parliament on 30 May. I have agreed to the implementation of an extension of the current contract of up to 12 months to enable the relevant due diligence work, and the associated Scottish Government assurance processes to be concluded prior to a final decision being made on the next CHFS contract. I was clear that the extension period would not be simply business as usual, and Transport Scotland is already working with CalMac to develop an enhancement and change plan with a consensus on the areas that will be addressed during the extension. Those include enhanced community voice, improved transparency through performance reporting, strengthened regionalisation and enhanced customer satisfaction.

As community engagement will be essential throughout the life of these services, I met the ferries community board on 12 June to discuss its priorities, and Transport Scotland is engaging with the board to explore how its role can be enhanced.

The current situation is a challenge, as we undoubtedly know. However, it is important that we highlight the six new vessels that will be delivered by 2026 to serve not just Arran, but Islay and the Little Minch, and which will have an impact across the whole network. I also look forward to seeing the improvements that will be realised through the new CHFS arrangements and the delivery of the islands connectivity plan.

I reiterate that we must all get behind our islands and say with a united voice that they are open for business.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is social justice. As ever, I would appreciate succinct questions and answers in order to allow as many members as possible to ask their questions.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the housing minister has had with ministerial colleagues regarding support available for veterans at risk of homelessness. (S6O-03605)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans attends the ministerial oversight group on homelessness, which I chair, in order to make connections across portfolios. The group last met on 5 June 2024, and it has met four times previously.

Working alongside the veterans minister, I am committed to raising the profile of veterans’ housing and homelessness at relevant meetings to ensure that stakeholders are aware of their obligations to provide veterans in Scotland with the best possible advice and support. I have had similar discussions with the Scottish veterans commissioner and veterans housing organisations.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Veterans often struggle to navigate the myriad support available to them, whether it be for homelessness, addiction or access to employment. Would the Scottish Government consider co-ordinating and documenting all the support that is available, to create a one-stop shop for veterans’ support?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I am happy to have a discussion about that with Maurice Golden. We have previously had discussions about housing options and organisations that do that job in Edinburgh. I am happy to pick that up for other parts of Scotland and to see what we can do on that issue.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Following Poppy Scotland’s successful count them in campaign, census information on the number of veterans in Scotland has recently been published for the first time. How does the Scottish Government plan to use that information to better support veterans, including through preventing homelessness?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The inclusion of a question on veteran status in the census for the first time marked a significant step forward in developing the evidence base on veterans in Scotland and their characteristics. In conjunction with our annual national homelessness statistics, officials will analyse the census outputs, which we will use to consider how we continue to support veterans and their families. A further update on our work to use emerging evidence to understand more about the circumstances and needs of veterans will be provided in the veterans minister’s next annual update to the Parliament.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Question 2 is from James Dornan, who joins us online.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

To ask the Scottish Government what impact the second round of the child poverty practice accelerator fund is anticipated to have in advancing the First Minister’s mission to eradicate child poverty in Scotland. (S6O-03606)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I was delighted last week to announce round 2 of the child poverty practice accelerator fund, which supports the First Minister’s mission to eradicate child poverty. We will make available up to £500,000 this financial year to support projects to test new and innovative ways to support the mission. That builds on the fund’s first round, launched in 2023, which is supporting a range of work, including important early intervention. Local authorities and health boards are already undertaking transformative work to tackle child poverty, and the fund supports them to go further to address root causes.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

The child poverty practice accelerator fund demonstrates how real investment in eradicating child poverty benefits families, our society and our economy. Under the plans put forward by the major Westminster parties, however, it seems that both the Tories and Labour are unwilling to make that investment, instead opting for low taxes for high earners and painful public spending cuts. Will the cabinet secretary outline what actions she and the Scottish Government require from the incoming United Kingdom Government if we are to achieve the First Minister’s mission to end child poverty in Scotland for good?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As the First Minister and I have said in the chamber before, we stand ready to work with an incoming UK Government to not only tackle but eradicate child poverty. Mr Dornan is quite right to point out the choices that make that more difficult. As he said, both of the major Westminster parties are focusing on low taxes for high earners and painful public spending cuts, rather than the eradication of child poverty.

Given that, this year, the Scottish Government has committed more than £3 billion to policies to tackle poverty, it is disappointing that no change has yet been suggested down at Westminster. It is inevitable that that will make the Scottish Government’s job more difficult, but we are determined to do what we can within the fixed financial envelope that we have and the powers that are available to the Parliament.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

The scale of the challenge that we face in Scotland is serious. As poverty levels have been static for the 17 years of this Scottish National Party Government, attempts to find new and effective approaches are welcome, but stakeholders will be concerned about how frustratingly slow the turnaround often is between learning about good practice and implementing it across the country. Indeed, in its recent report, the Poverty and Inequality Commission said that, in its next update on the child poverty figures, the Scottish Government

“cannot just point to actions already taken nor propose more small-scale tests of change.”

How will the cabinet secretary ensure that learning from the accelerator fund is used nationwide to give us whatever chance is left of meeting the statutory 2030 targets?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Government remains absolutely committed to achieving the child poverty targets that have been laid down in statute. At the moment, the effect that the Scottish child payment is having is not yet showing up in the child poverty statistics, but our modelling suggests that it is having a very important impact.

What will not help is the £18 billion-worth of cuts that the Institute for Fiscal Studies has suggested that the spending plans of both Labour and the Conservatives will make in our public services. [ Interruption .] That makes it more—

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Please resume your seat for a second, cabinet secretary. I will not have sedentary chitchat across the benches while someone else is speaking.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

That makes it more difficult for us to eradicate child poverty. However, as I said in my original answer, we are determined to do everything that we can. Children and families in Scotland deserve no less of this Government or, indeed, of any incoming UK Government.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Question 3 has been withdrawn.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that homeless women are not safe in hostels. (S6O-03608)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

It is vital that the use of emergency accommodation for women who are experiencing homelessness does not exacerbate any of the issues that may have led to them presenting as homeless, such as domestic abuse, mental health issues, substance use or a disability or impairment.

Temporary accommodation is an important safety net and, when support services are provided, care must be taken to ensure the safety of everyone who is accommodated. Our homelessness statistics show that accommodation in the social rented sector is the most common type of temporary accommodation that is used by local authorities. Social rented accommodation accounts for 55 per cent of the temporary accommodation that is used by local authorities, with hostels being used in only a small number—9 per cent—of cases.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

The most recent figures, which go up to 2022, show that 67 women in Scotland had died in homeless accommodation over a three-year period. The fact that the situation is getting steadily worse as a result of systemic failure is acknowledged by the Scottish Housing Regulator.

Sinead Watson, a 33-year-old woman who spent 40 weeks in homeless accommodation, spoke of her experience. She said:

“Over the past months, I have stayed in three separate hostels. I have been threatened, assaulted and robbed. I have had no sense of security or safety, and women with addiction are bribed into sex. I saw it in all three hostels that I stayed in. The women in these hostels are fair game.”

We urgently need to provide safe and secure same-sex emergency housing to stop more women dying. That would be a simple first step in ensuring that these vulnerable women in crisis are not put at further risk of rape, sexual assault and trauma.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Ms Regan, we need a question.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

Will the Government commit to protecting vulnerable women in crisis by ensuring that temporary accommodation in Scotland is single sex?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I thank Ash Regan for raising such an important point and pointing out the trauma that women are going through.

The Scottish Government is committed to dignity and respect for all. The Equality Act 2010 provides protection for women. The Scottish Government strongly supports the separate and single-sex exceptions that are in the 2010 act, which allow for women to have single-sex spaces.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I agree with Ash Regan. The Government needs to understand the facts of what people are experiencing. The minister mentioned a figure of 9 per cent, but in Edinburgh it is much higher. People are being mixed together in unacceptable situations: families, single men, and women who are experiencing homelessness. Often, those women have fled domestic abuse but are put into those situations, and they then leave them to become homeless, because they feel safer on the streets. Will the minister look at reviewing the situation, and get the third sector to be part of that? In so many options out there, we do not use the third sector, and it wants to be part of a solution.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The Scottish Government’s delivering equally safe fund is providing more than £7 million this year to local women’s aid groups for support for services for women and children.

We have introduced provisions in the Housing (Scotland) Bill that, if passed, will put a duty on social landlords to develop and implement a domestic abuse policy that outlines how they will support their tenants who are at risk of homelessness, including protecting the right of women to stay safely in their own homes. We will continue to work closely with the housing and violence against women and girls sectors to develop statutory guidance to accompany that duty.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government how many homes provided by social landlords have been identified as containing reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. (S6O-03609)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The Scottish Housing Regulator has been engaging with social landlords to understand the context of RAAC in their properties. The latest figures from the regulator show that 13 social landlords have identified the presence of RAAC, and 1,994 homes are affected.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Last week, we marked the seventh anniversary of the Grenfell tower tragedy. It has taken the Scottish Government seven years to bring forward and get passed the Housing (Cladding Remediation) (Scotland) Act 2024. In seven years, only two multistorey dwellings in Scotland—out of more than 100—have had any remedial action taken to remove inflammable cladding. People have been evacuated from their homes, from Tillicoultry to Torry, because of the dangers of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. How long will they have to wait? What is the Government’s timescale for ensuring that all those living with RAAC in their homes, across Scotland, are safe?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

There are a number of issues in that. The cladding issue is similar in some ways to RAAC, but it is different in many other ways. RAAC can be present in buildings without posing an immediate risk. I have engaged with a number of local authorities—for example, West Lothian Council and Aberdeen City Council—over the specific options that they are looking at. We await option appraisals from a number of local authorities. I meet them regularly on the subject.

As I have said, there are specific guidelines to recommend whether a property is safe. I will continue to engage with local authorities in that regard, and with the regulator. I am happy to discuss that further with Mr Leonard.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

Given that the Scottish budget is already stretched to the limit by Westminster capital spending cuts, will the minister call on the incoming United Kingdom Government to prioritise a dedicated RAAC fund as a matter of urgency, with appropriate consequentials for Scotland?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

As members will be aware, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had committed to

“spend what it takes”

to deal with the issue of RAAC. However, no funding has been forthcoming, and neither the Labour Party nor the Conservatives have committed to any financial support in their election manifestos. In addition, the UK Government failed to inflation-proof its capital budget, which has resulted in nearly a 9 per cent real-terms cut in our UK capital funding between 2023-24 and 2027-28. I hope that members across the chamber will join me in calling on an incoming UK Government to deliver a dedicated fund. [ Interruption .] I can hear Mr Leonard talking about that. If he can speak to, and use any influence that he has, with an incoming UK chancellor or UK housing minister, I will be happy to discuss that with him.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Members, this is not a free-for-all across the chamber. Speak through the chair, please. Thank you.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the provision of emergency homeless accommodation in the West Scotland region. (S6O-03610)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Scotland has the strongest rights in the United Kingdom for people who are experiencing homelessness. Local authorities have a duty to provide temporary accommodation to any homeless household that needs it. In some cases, that might be done on an emergency basis. Local authorities are responsible for assessing demand for temporary accommodation and provision in their areas. Recent homelessness statistics show that local authorities in the West Scotland region consistently provide temporary accommodation to people who require it. We have maintained the homeless budget at broadly similar levels to last year’s. I regularly meet housing conveners across Scotland to understand the pressures in their areas, including the demand for temporary accommodation. We last met on Tuesday. In addition, I met representatives of Glasgow City Council this morning to discuss that specific issue.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Two weeks ago, I attended a meeting with Police Scotland and others about a hotel in Paisley being used as emergency accommodation. Local families are living in fear due to regular outbreaks of violence and blatant drug dealing. Police are never far away from the place. The authorities wrongly downplay that as antisocial behaviour, which it is not—it is criminality. One woman told the Paisley Daily Express that occupants are

“drinking, smoking, smashing glass, swearing and making abusive comments to people, particularly women and kids when they go past. It’s unpleasant and threatening.”

What, if anything, can the Scottish Government do to end that misery for residents?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I will add some context. Local authorities in the West Scotland region, which Mr Findlay represents, are receiving more than £1 million of funding for rapid rehousing transition plans. I would be happy to pick up the issue of the particular property that he has referred to. It has not been fed back to me, but I would be happy to liaise with him on that and take it up with officials.

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

The erosion of UK Government benefits, including housing benefits, is a significant driver for homelessness and the need for emergency accommodation in Glasgow, the west of Scotland and beyond. Has the Scottish Government made any assessment of the record £90 million of discretionary housing payments that it has provided to mitigate those cuts? Does the minister agree that the key way to support homelessness prevention and to avoid emergency accommodation in the first place is for any incoming UK Government to significantly uplift housing benefits, which have been gutted by a decade of Tory austerity?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I fully agree with Bob Doris’s statement. His view is backed up by a recent report by Crisis through its homelessness monitor study, which picked up that two of the biggest issues are local housing allowance and the rate of universal credit. This year, the Scottish Government has increased the funding for discretionary housing payments by £6.8 million, to provide additional support for households who are struggling to meet housing costs. Discretionary housing payments are a vital tool to reduce poverty, safeguard tenancies and prevent homelessness. However, the fact that we need to spend that money at all shows that the UK welfare system is not fit for purpose. We will continue to push whichever party forms the next Westminster Government to end the bedroom tax, scrap the benefit cap, and permanently link local housing allowance rates with rents, to end the uncertainty that private renters face.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to tackle poverty in black and minority ethnic households. (S6O-03611)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Despite Scotland receiving the most challenging settlement in the history of devolution in last year’s United Kingdom Government budget, the Scottish Government is doing all that it can to prioritise investment to tackle and reduce poverty here, including investment that will benefit black and minority ethnic households. That includes committing £6.3 billion for social security benefits and payments, investing nearly £600 million to support the delivery of affordable homes and providing more than £370 million to enable free bus travel for more than 2 million people. In addition, our anti-racist employment strategy seeks to reduce income inequality for racialised minorities by supporting employers to address barriers so that people from such minorities can enter, progress in and stay in employment.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

According to the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights, underemployment disproportionately affects black and minority ethnic communities, with underemployment severely contributing to the growing proportion of families in in-work poverty. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that high-quality and secure work is made available for people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I have already referred to the Government’s anti-racist employment strategy, which I believe is having an impact. It sets out the actions that the Scottish Government will take to reduce employment inequalities for racialised minorities. They include evaluation of the minority ethnic recruitment toolkit that we published in 2020, and the development of an anti-racist workplace training framework. The impact of those actions will be measured through the evidence plan for the fair work action plan, to ensure that they support our ambition of becoming a fair work nation.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of Audit Scotland’s analysis showing that Social Security Scotland’s benefit expenditure budget was £5.1 billion in 2023-24, which was an increase of 22 per cent on its 2022-23 budget, what action it is taking to reduce expenditure on Scottish social security benefits, including through assisting people into meaningful paid employment. (S6O-03612)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Social security is a priority for this Government, and we are proud of our significant investment to ensure that people receive the support that they are entitled to. When all our benefits have been introduced and clients have been transferred from the Department for Work and Pensions, Social Security Scotland will support around one in three people in Scotland, the vast majority of whom are disabled and unpaid carers.

We continue to support employment opportunities within the limits of our devolved powers, with up to £90 million for employability services through the no one left behind plan this year, and the remaining delivery of fair start Scotland funding.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I am pleased that the minister mentioned those with disabilities in our workforce, for example. One of the points of feedback from Inclusion Scotland was that many people who had to leave the workplace due to the pandemic have struggled to get back into work, and have found the whole process quite daunting. What is the Scottish Government doing to support jobseekers and employers to assist those who have been out of the workplace for a particularly long time to make that move, which can be daunting, and to get them back into the workforce?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I thank Jamie Greene for that question. It is important that we look at the disability employment gap and what can be done. Some of the responsibility and powers for that lie with the Scottish Government and some with the UK Government, and both Governments need to do more on it. We are determined to do just that.

A number of mechanisms and policies are in place—I mentioned no one left behind in my original answer. That is a very important way of making a tailored service available to everybody. The Government also works with employers to ensure that they recognise the importance and significance of the role that disabled people and their carers can play in the employment market—even those who have perhaps not been in the labour market for some time. That is a commitment that we are absolutely determined to take forward.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

On 4 June, in the stage 1 debate on the Social Security (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, Tory social security spokesperson Jeremy Balfour said:

“As a Parliament, we should be demanding that all benefits in Scotland are inflation proofed.”—[Official Report, 4 June 2024; c 28.]

That should be a priority even if our block grant from the UK Government is below inflation. Mr Greene clearly disagrees with that. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is astonishing that the Tories are utterly incapable of speaking with one voice on something as fundamental as Social Security Scotland’s budget?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Cabinet secretary, please respond on the matters within your responsibility.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Mr Gibson is quite right to point out the variety of different calls that I receive from the Scottish Conservatives on the issue. In his original question, Jamie Greene seemed to suggest that we may wish or need to cut social security expenditure. I say to the Conservatives and to the Labour Party, which shares its policies on social security with the Conservatives, that the best way that we can do that is through changes in the UK social security system so that we do not have to spend, for example, £134 million a year mitigating some of the worst excesses of the UK Government’s system. That would allow the Scottish Government to work to introduce more anti-poverty measures, which we are determined to do. It is disappointing that the current Government—and, I would suggest, any incoming Government—is refusing to take up that challenge.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes portfolio questions on social justice. There will be a very short pause before we move on to the next item of business, to allow front-bench teams to change positions, should they so wish.

Provisional Outturn 2023-24

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Ivan McKee on the 2023-24 provisional outturn. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

I welcome the opportunity to update Parliament on the provisional outturn against the budget for the 2023-24 financial year. The provisional outturn demonstrates once again that the Scottish Government is prudently and competently managing Scotland’s finances while protecting our priorities and ensuring that we have sustained effective delivery of public services.

Managing the financial position for 2023-24 once again represented a significant challenge. The continued impact of persistently high inflation, combined with pressure on public sector pay, backlogs as a result of the Covid pandemic, and the on-going war in Ukraine have placed pressure on the public finances. In addition, inflationary pressures continued to impact households and businesses across the country.

The Scottish Government’s budget must balance each and every financial year. The majority of our funding continues to be tied to the decisions of the United Kingdom Government and, as such, it is subject to high levels of uncertainty until very late in the financial year.

Although the fiscal framework was revised in August 2023 and it offers some additional flexibility, we are still unable to borrow to meet day-to-day costs. Our income tax powers do not allow changes to be made during the current financial year. The only real lever that we have to respond to emerging pressures and ensure that we balance the budget is to reprioritise current year spending plans. No one should underestimate the scale of that challenge. Our spending is committed to supporting vital public services.

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has already made clear to the Parliament some of the difficult choices that had to be taken over the course of this year. With careful management and rigorous reprioritisation, Scottish Government funding has been channelled to where it is most needed.

However, this statement is not just about the challenges that we have had to manage; I also want to underline the positives. We have continued to proactively drive efficiency savings and to maximise income streams. In 2023-24, we supported fair and affordable pay deals for workers who provide our essential public services, thereby avoiding strike action and minimising further disruption for the people of Scotland. Through meaningful engagement with trade unions and employers, the Scottish Government provided a record junior doctor pay deal and an increased agenda for change pay deal. Over the past two years, we have invested an additional £1 billion in national health service agenda for change pay to support staff through the cost of living crisis.

We spent nearly £5.2 billion on social security benefits, including £429 million on the Scottish child payment. That payment, which is unique to Scotland, lifts families out of poverty and helps with the cost of living crisis.

The carer support payment was introduced in pilot areas. Once it is fully rolled out, in 2024, that will allow thousands more unpaid carers to receive the benefit.

During 2023-24, we also widened the eligibility for best start foods. That will mean that an estimated 20,000 people will be able to access money to help to provide milk and healthy food for their children.

In 2023-24, we spent over £160 million on the Ukrainian resettlement programme to ensure that people continued to receive a warm Scots welcome and were supported to rebuild their lives in our communities for as long as they need to call Scotland home.

We continued to support a strong Scottish economy. The 2023 Ernst & Young attractiveness survey showed that Scotland outpaced both the UK and Europe for the second year in a row in attracting inward investment projects. Indeed, Scotland has been the top-performing part of the UK for inward investment projects outside London for the past eight years.

We continue to outperform the UK as a whole in delivering long-term reductions in Scotland’s greenhouse gas emissions in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2045.

Domestically, we have continued support for our multiyear grant funding from the just transition fund, with £16.8 million spent on projects to deliver our just transition aims and positive impacts for the north-east and Moray regions. In addition, in 2023, we committed, allocated and spent another £3 million to support vulnerable global communities to address loss and damage. That brought our total commitment to £10 million.

On rail services, revenue growth exceeded budget forecasts due to effective delivery of services and the benefits of partnership working with the trade unions for the public sector railway. In Scotland, we avoided the costly industrial relations disruption that impacted other rail operators. Enhanced deployment of customer support teams helped to reduce fare evasion and antisocial behaviour, thereby building customer confidence and increasing revenue.

A continued focus on controlling the costs of delivery has contributed to the improvement of the net cost of delivering Scotland’s rail service. The finalisation of the closure of the previous franchise agreement for ScotRail also resulted in a one-off receipt back to the Government from Abellio.

That, and other savings that were generated as part of our work to make our public sector more efficient and to release more funds to the front line, have resulted in savings across a number of portfolios, which have contributed to our underspend in 2023-24. Those savings are welcome, and they are available to support essential services in this financial year.

We will continue to press the UK Government to provide funding to meet pressures and to allow us to deliver a broad range of high-quality public services and to improve the lives of the people of Scotland. The Scottish Government is absolutely committed to delivering on our priorities—priorities that have the most immediate benefits for our people in their everyday lives: eradicating child poverty, growing a thriving economy, ensuring sustainable and excellent public services and tackling the climate emergency.

I now turn to the 2023-24 provisional outturn. Under the current devolution settlement, the Scottish Government is not permitted to overspend its budget. We must therefore operate within a tight margin of just over 1 per cent. The level of volatility in our overall funding envelope continues to increase. Our block grant is not finalised until February each year. We only received confirmation of an additional £500 million of funding just six weeks before the end of the financial year. While we welcome that additional funding, the timing highlights the challenge in managing the financial position.

I am pleased to confirm that, despite that volatility, the Scottish Government has once again delivered a balanced budget, with a provisional fiscal outturn for 2023-24 of £49.3 billion, against a total fiscal budget of £49.6 billion. The remaining budget of £292 million, which represents just 0.6 per cent of our total budget, will be carried forward in full through the Scotland reserve if confirmed at final outturn. That incorporates £162 million of fiscal resource, £130 million of capital and a break-even position in financial transactions.

I must stress that there is no loss of spending power to the Scottish Government as a result of that small underspend. Indeed, £109 million of the capital underspend was anticipated at the spring budget revision and, of the resource position, around £100 million is required annually to manage the post-year-end audit adjustments, with the remainder to be utilised to support the 2024-25 budget.

In setting out his priorities for Scotland to Parliament in May, the First Minister highlighted the enormous financial pressures facing the Scottish Government. As has been said before, we are required to manage our spend against an annual budget that is not confirmed until the final quarter of the financial year. We cannot overspend. Therefore, our financial strategy is to plan a modest underspend to mitigate the risks of post-year-end audit adjustments, as have occurred in previous years. Managing the position to a 0.6 per cent underspend underlines the financial competence of the Government.

I know that colleagues across the chamber follow these matters closely and that, for the most part, they have a robust understanding of the intricacies of accounting standards. I am sure, therefore, that I do not need to remind them that an element of our budget allocation from HM Treasury is non-cash. That is used for accounting adjustments, predominantly depreciation. To reiterate previous references to that ring-fenced budget, it cannot be used to support day-to-day spending, nor does it flow to the Scotland reserve. It is therefore not included in our headline provisional outturn results.

For 2023-24, an underspend of £1.1 billion is shown against a budget of £2.5 billion. A large proportion of that budget, circa £900 million, relates to non-cash consequentials for student loan impairments, which are simply not required at the same level in Scotland because of our policy of free university tuition.

I emphasise that the figures that I am reporting to the Parliament today remain provisional, as they are subject to change pending completion of 2023-24 year-end audits. Finalised figures will be reported as usual in the annual Scottish Government consolidated accounts and a statement of total outturn later this financial year.

I commend today’s figures to the Parliament.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the minister for prior sight of his statement. He is absolutely correct to say that the Scottish Government cannot overspend its budget, and he is also quite correct to say that any underspend does not equate to funds that are lost to the Scottish Government. What the final outturn statement provides is detail about the choices that are being made by the Scottish Government and the time period in which it is spending the funds that are available to it.

First, will the minister accept the recent Fraser of Allander Institute statistics that show that, excluding the Covid spend, the block grant for the 2023-24 outturn period when measured against current prices was higher than in previous years, which therefore benefited Scottish Government spending? Secondly, does he recognise that there are many in the education sector who might feel very let down by the extent of the underspend in their portfolio when there are so many immediate and pressing issues in our colleges and universities, especially relating to skills and training budgets? Thirdly, on a different but nonetheless related issue, when it comes to spending taxpayers’ money, the Scottish Government has—by its own admission, in some ways—got itself into a complete muddle over what European Union funds were available to spend in a particular time period and what had to be handed back. What is the Scottish Government doing to improve the transparency of public spending, as requested by Audit Scotland?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

I thank Liz Smith for her questions, and I appreciate her recognition of the process with regard to these numbers and the fact that the money is not lost. Indeed, it goes back to the Scotland reserve and will be available to spend this year. A significant portion of the headline number is non-cash, which we cannot translate into spending on day-to-day activities. The reality is that Scotland’s budget from the UK has been reduced in real terms. If we look back over the period, we will find that that is indeed the case. That is why we are in the unprecedentedly difficult fiscal position that we find ourselves in.

With regard to spending on education, the Government clearly set out its priorities when it announced its budget. Today, we are going through the outturn numbers that compare against the budget that was laid out by the Government and approved by the Parliament. The Government gives huge priority to our education system, not just for the benefit that it delivers for individuals but for the wider societal and economic benefits that our schools, colleges and universities provide as a consequence of the funding that they receive from the Scottish Government’s budget.

I am committed to ensuring that we are as transparent as possible on the funding that we provide and the way in which that funding is managed. That will be the case as I take forward my work as Minister for Public Finance and the work that I am leading on public sector reform.