Scottish Parliament, 5 September 2024

277 contributions from 70 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The first item of business is general question time. In order to get in as many members as possible, I would be grateful for succinct questions, and answers to match.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs last met with the chief constable of Police Scotland. (S6O-03677)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I regularly meet the chief constable and other members of Police Scotland’s executive team. My most recent meeting was on 20 August. Although the chief constable is accountable to the Scottish Police Authority, our meetings provide an opportunity to focus on matters of strategic importance and the key priorities for policing.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of a spike in antisocial behaviour across the bus network in Scotland. In East Lothian, that has included young people lobbing rocks at buses and assaults on passengers. Last week, a pregnant woman was allegedly pushed off a bench while waiting at a bus stop in Tranent. She was left bleeding and in pain and, tragically, after waiting in an ambulance, she later miscarried. Her husband has appealed to parents and family members to speak to young people and to

“remind them everyday how to respect people and behave in public places.”

I therefore ask the cabinet secretary what discussions she has had with Police Scotland about policing on the bus network, particularly since the introduction of free bus travel for under-22s. Will she join me in calling for a policy of zero tolerance of antisocial behaviour on Scotland’s bus network?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The circumstances that Craig Hoy has narrated are truly shocking. We should be thankful that the vast majority of our young people are people to be proud of, and are excellent citizens and contributors to, the country in which we live.

I reassure Mr Hoy that I and the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, as well as our ministerial colleagues in transport, are very much engaged in the issue. He might wish to look at the programme for government, where we talk about the on-going work on violence reduction and the actions that will be taken to tackle antisocial behaviour.

Mr Hoy is right to suggest that people who work on our bus and other public transport networks should not have to put up with any kind of deplorable or violent behaviour.

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

Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on recruitment plans that the chief constable has with regard to increasing police officer numbers?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I am pleased to confirm that, this year, Police Scotland is set to take on more recruits than at any time since its inception in 2013. Since March, Police Scotland has welcomed around 680 new officers and, since the beginning of 2023, has welcomed more than 1,280 new recruits. Police Scotland has plans for further intakes throughout the year, with the chief constable confirming that our budget settlement will enable Police Scotland to recruit enough officers to increase numbers back to the region of 16,500 to 16,600 over the course of this financial year.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to support communities to bring derelict buildings back into use as houses. (S6O-03678)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

The Scottish Government has put in place an enabling policy framework, including national planning framework 4, which supports prioritising sites allocated for housing development and local development plans and encourages the reuse of brownfield, vacant and derelict land and empty buildings. Support is also available for viable projects through a variety of mechanisms, such as the rural and islands housing fund. Of course, it is for each local authority to determine its housing strategy and implementation with regard to the affordable housing supply programme.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Recently, I was in Raasay, discussing the massive impact of six new homes being built in the community. However, although the population is currently around 200, it is estimated that there are already enough homes in Raasay to support up to 500 people; they are just not being used as homes, and 46 per cent of them are empty.

Building new houses, especially in rural and island areas, can be cheaper than repairing and retrofitting, and lots of depopulating areas have significant waiting lists for housing and a significant presence on Airbnb. What more will be done to support rural and island housing providers to buy back, repair and retrofit existing homes?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I have had the pleasure of meeting representatives of the Raasay Development Trust twice online to discuss its carbon neutral island project, as well as its broader work. Officials continue to work closely with the trust.

I mentioned the rural and islands housing fund earlier, and the affordable housing plans in Raasay have been embedded, with an insistence that not just the housing situation but the energy efficiency of the current stock improves. I commend the trust on the work that it has been doing, and I am happy to discuss the issue further with Ms Roddick.

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

To ask the Scottish Government how much it has spent on mitigating any United Kingdom Government reductions to UK-wide benefits since 2019. (S6O-03679)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Since 2019, we have invested £750 million mitigating the impacts of UK Government policies such as the harmful bedroom tax and benefit cap, as well as shortfalls in local housing allowance rates. That includes almost £134 million this year through activities such as the discretionary housing payments and the Scottish welfare fund. That money could fund around 2,000 teachers or band 5 nurses each year, or it could fund further ambitious anti-poverty measures such as our game-changing Scottish child payment.

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

That brings home the costs of being in the union and under the UK economy.

I ask the cabinet secretary to focus on the bedroom tax, or spare-room tax, which we mitigate. Can she tell me how many homes are helped by the Scottish Government paying it, so that households do not have to meet it themselves?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Christine Grahame raises a very important point. It might, perhaps, be assumed that the bedroom tax has been scrapped, but it was not scrapped under the previous Conservative Government, and there have certainly been no announcements that Labour will do anything like taking such a measure.

We remain committed to mitigating the bedroom tax in full. That helps 92,000 households in Scotland to sustain their tenancies, which is an important aspect of our anti-poverty and housing policies.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking in light of the most recent annual update on suicide statistics showing that people living in Scotland’s most deprived areas are 2.5 times more likely to die by suicide than those living in the least deprived areas. (S6O-03680)

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

Every life lost to suicide is an absolute tragedy, and my condolences go out to the families and communities who are behind those numbers.

Tackling the causes and effects of poverty is a key Government mission, and it is central to the ambitious programme of work that is being taken forward across government and within communities under our joint Scottish Government and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities suicide prevention strategy.

We are focused on reducing deaths by suicide while tackling inequalities and supporting deprived and marginalised groups who are at greater risk. Alongside our social campaign, increased peer support and targeted programmes supporting communities are critical. Since 2021 we have awarded nearly 5,000 grants to local projects, totalling £66 million, through our communities mental health and wellbeing fund for adults.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I agree that behind all those deaths is a person, their family, their friends and their loved ones—and a lot of heartbreak. When will the Scottish Government be reporting on the impact of the 2023-24 priorities in the suicide action plan? Does the minister agree that we must understand the impact of those plans and strategies if we are to move forward, and if we are to try to reduce the number of suicides in Scotland?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

Just last month we had the first meeting of the leadership board for the mental health and wellbeing plan. I am more than happy to write to Alex Rowley to update him on the work that is on-going and on how the plan is likely to be implemented. The member will know that the suicide implementation plan will be carried out over a period of 10 years. Although there is currently a focus on the early stages of that plan, it is a long-term plan. I am happy to write to the member with more details about how we will keep Parliament aware of how the plan is progressing.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

As the minister said, every life lost to suicide is a huge tragedy. My thoughts are with all those who are affected—as, I know, are those of members across the chamber.

Will the minister provide an update on the Scottish Government’s creating hope together year 2 delivery plan, which was published in July this year—in particular, the focus on strengthening Scotland’s awareness and responsiveness to suicide and people who are suicidal?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

The two-year delivery plan builds on the considerable progress that was made during 2023-24. We are proud of the difference that we are making by improving suicide awareness, increasing the availability of peer support across our communities and using clinical evidence and our time, space and compassion approach to drive improvements in statutory services.

With continued focus on groups that are at risk of suicide, many of the actions are designed to reach and support people who are impacted by discrimination, stigma and the wider social determinants of suicide. Work is under way on expanding the campaign and learning activities, growing our social movement and engaging new audiences. We are improving responses that people receive in unscheduled care settings, such as accident and emergency departments. We are also developing a new portal to ensure that people who feel suicidal know where to go for help.

I am happy to update Bill Kidd in writing with the full suite of actions that we are taking, as was mentioned to Alex Rowley.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Organisations such as the men’s sheds and Andy’s Man Club in my region play vital roles in eliminating the stigma surrounding mental health, and in creating judgment-free confidential spaces where men can be open about the storms in their lives. What more can be done to ensure that those important organisations can carry on the work that is desperately needed?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I absolutely agree on the point about stigma. It is a challenge for all of us and one that all of us share. Stigma prevents people from accessing the help to which they are entitled and to which they have a right, so work to tackle it is vital.

Men’s sheds have had an assurance of funding from another portfolio in the Government. We have also contributed through a number of different programmes. We have invested in the Sam’s cafe project, Andy’s Man Club, the wellbeing on wheels service and the roll-out of our distress brief intervention programme. We are investing in a suite of other measures, as well as in men’s sheds.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 5 was not lodged.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported significant increase in shoplifting recorded in Scotland. (S6O-03682)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The Scottish Government absolutely recognises the disruption and harm to businesses from theft and other antisocial behaviour. Police Scotland and partners are taking action to tackle and reduce it.

We continue to support the innovative Scottish partnership against acquisitive crime—SPAACE—strategy. The partnership is led by Police Scotland working with retailers and other organisations—including Retailers Against Crime and Neighbourhood Watch Scotland—and focuses on prevention, deterrence and, where appropriate, enforcement. The strategy seeks to minimise opportunities for acquisitive crime, to protect individuals and businesses and to deliver clear advice and guidance for prevention.

Furthermore, each local area has a local police plan, which has been refreshed for 2023 to 2026. Many of those plans include specific activities that focus on acquisitive crime and engagement with partners and stakeholders, which focuses on addressing retailers’ concerns at a local level.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Shoplifting crimes across Scotland saw a dramatic 34 per cent increase between June 2023 and June 2024, with a 40 per cent rise in East Ayrshire and a 22 per cent rise in South Ayrshire. Those figures are only for crimes that are recorded.

Retailers are facing attacks on their livelihoods. With officer numbers at their lowest since the Scottish National Party came into power, response times are said to be unsatisfactory or significantly delayed. It is clear that the current approach is simply not working, with a high percentage of retailers saying that they also face violence and abuse. What specific steps is the Scottish Government taking to support retailers and improve police response times to better protect our local communities?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The budget for police funding, even in these extremely challenging times, is £1.55 billion, which is an increase of £92.7 million. The chief constable has confirmed that Scottish Government investment will enable Police Scotland to recruit and increase police numbers.

Earlier this year, I met the retail industry leadership group and the Scottish Retail Consortium, which raised concerns about antisocial behaviour and an increase in theft. It may be interesting for the member to find out about an initiative that Police Scotland is piloting in Fife, where Police Scotland is coming together with partners and information technology providers to help to develop a platform that allows staff in stores to send details of crimes direct to Police Scotland. I hope that that initiative will be rolled out across Scotland.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am a member of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, which is the shop workers union.

In 2016, USDAW’s freedom from fear survey found that 2 per cent of shop workers suffered violence. By 2023, that had risen to 18 per cent. Shoplifting is a key trigger for that. The minister mentioned information sharing; what steps can be taken to spread that across the country? Although we understand that the police cannot attend every incident, it is important to gather evidence so that those who repeatedly carry out such crimes are brought to book, prosecuted and punished for crimes that, ultimately, end up being violent, when shop workers suffer as a result.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

As well as the SPAACE initiative with Police Scotland, it is important to recognise some of the good collaborative work that is happening across Scotland. I have visited several projects in Stirling and Inverclyde, where local authorities are coming together with Police Scotland, education providers and local businesses to tackle issues. It is important to reiterate the importance of local police plans.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any steps that it is taking to ensure that any increases in the Scottish Police Authority resource budget continue to support further police recruitment, in light of the challenging financial circumstances as a result of the United Kingdom Government’s proposed financial settlement. (S6O-03683)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As has been made clear this week, following the UK chancellor’s July statement, the Scottish Government continues to face the most challenging financial situation since devolution. Despite the UK Government’s cuts to our budget, we have provided Police Scotland with record funding of £1.55 billion this year, which is an increase of £92.7 million; £75.7 million of that is for resource, which allows Police Scotland to increase its officer numbers.

Police Scotland indicated that there were about 16,400 officers at the beginning of August, and more than 680 new officers have been recruited since March. I am pleased to say that the police will take on more recruits this year than at any time since 2013.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Although it is welcome that the Scottish National Party Government will do everything that it can to protect front-line services and the public from the Westminster attack on Scotland’s public spending, will the cabinet secretary expand on the potential impact that the Labour Government’s decision to stick to the Tories’ fiscal rules will have on delivering a fit-for-purpose Police Scotland service in the long term?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

In the face of the financial challenges, the Government has made it clear that we will support people where that is needed most, including in our public services, such as policing. As we know, all roads lead to Westminster, and we have been told that things will only get worse. We need the UK Government to invest so that we can get our proportionate share. If it cuts, we will feel the brunt of that.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Cabinet secretary, I am conscious that a lot of conversation is taking place across the chamber. I would be grateful if members focused on the cabinet secretary’s response.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I conclude by saying that Labour austerity is as damaging as Tory austerity. This Government continues to call on the UK Government to invest in public services and crucial capital infrastructure.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to take any action in relation to reported concerns regarding how the 2018 GP contract is working in the Highlands and Islands. (S6O-03684)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Under the 2018 GP contract, health boards and integration authorities are responsible for establishing and maintaining multidisciplinary teams, working closely with their local GP representatives and communities. In doing that, it is fundamental that those services meet the needs of local patients—none more so than in our rural and island communities. Although we have made good progress on implementation nationally, we know that implementation gaps and challenges remain. We continue to work with all partners that are involved in implementing the contract to further understand and tackle on-going challenges, including in the Highlands and Islands.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It is absolutely clear that, as a result of the 2018 GP contract, there are fewer GPs and fewer independent GP surgeries in the Highlands, and patients are having to travel hundreds of miles for immunisations. Getting primary care right is critical to avoiding expensive secondary care. Given that the contract is failing in the Highlands, will the Scottish Government undertake to review, and ultimately replace, the contract, as it is not working?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I agree with Edward Mountain that having strong and sustainable primary care services is critically important to avoiding people’s ill health escalating and their moving into more expensive and problematic secondary care services. That is why we are investing in the likes of the Scottish graduate entry medicine programme, so that more rural GPs come through the system, and why we are investing, through the contract, in multidisciplinary teams to ensure that we have a more sustainable general practice position, including in areas in the Highlands and Islands.

I saw some of that in action over the summer, when I visited the likes of the Western Isles and Islay, where I saw for myself the impact that the multidisciplinary teams are having. I would be happy to discuss that further with Edward Mountain.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes general question time.

First Minister’s Question Time

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Yesterday, John Swinney said that eradicating child poverty would be his Government’s top priority. However, since his statement, we have heard the following.

Fiona King of Save the Children said:

“The reality is there is nothing in this programme for government that truly shifts the dial on child poverty.”

Dr Lindsey MacDonald of Magic Breakfast said:

“Far from a manifesto on the eradication of child poverty, this plan will struggle to make a significant dent in the child poverty crisis that Scotland faces.”

Mary Glasgow, chief executive of Children 1st, said that the charity was

“deeply concerned that the drastic cuts to public spending will throw many children and families already in crisis over the edge.”

So, who is right: John Swinney or the growing list of experts who say that his programme will fail to tackle child poverty?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise the enormity of the challenge that we face on child poverty; that is why it is my Government’s central mission to eradicate child poverty. The reason why child poverty levels are so high is that Scotland has suffered from 14 years of Conservative austerity and welfare cuts that have forced families into poverty. That has resulted in the Scottish Government taking steps to spend more than £400 million on measures such as the Scottish child payment, which, along with our other measures, is keeping 100,000 children out of poverty.

I respect all the organisations and individuals that Douglas Ross raised with me. Those are people who care deeply about the eradication of poverty, as do I. I think that they would accept that child poverty has been made the crisis that it is in our country today because of the actions for which Douglas Ross voted when he supported the Conservative Government in the House of Commons.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

John Swinney says that he respects and cares deeply about those experts. However, they were not speaking about previous decisions of the UK Government or current decisions of the Labour Government—they were commenting on his programme for government and, specifically, on the lack of action within it to tackle child poverty.

If the First Minister will not listen to those experts, perhaps John Swinney will listen to John Swinney. When he was Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, he announced the policy of free school meals for every primary school pupil in Scotland, and he said:

“we must not go back to kids going hungry in the classroom.”

First, that policy was supposed to happen in 2022; then it was delayed to 2026; and now the programme for government seems to have ditched it entirely. Can the First Minister be honest with people across Scotland? Will his Government deliver on its promise of free school meals to all primary school pupils during the current session of Parliament?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I in no way dismissed the expert commentary that Douglas Ross put to me. I will not have him misrepresenting my words in Parliament. I respect all those commentators, just as I respect the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which, in its “UK Poverty 2023” report, said:

“Divergence in policy across nations will probably drive greater disparity in poverty rates across”

the UK. It also said:

“Scotland has taken decisive action in defining child poverty targets in legislation and enhancing the benefits system with a Scottish child payment”.

The latest statistics show that the child poverty rate in Scotland is 24 per cent, compared with 30 per cent in England, 29 per cent in Wales and 23 per cent in Northern Ireland. I simply put that data on the record to demonstrate that we are taking action, but we are having to swim against a tide of austerity and welfare cuts that were inflicted on us by the previous Conservative Government, of which Douglas Ross was a supporter. That is before we get near the financial wreckage done by Liz Truss, which Douglas Ross wanted me to emulate. Thank goodness I did not do that.

The challenges that we face were well rehearsed to Parliament by the finance secretary on Tuesday. Cumulative inflation, which has been calculated at 18.9 per cent over the past three years, has undermined the value of the money that we have available. The Government will deliver the commitment that I set out yesterday, which is to ensure that free school meals are available for all primary 1 to primary 5 pupils on a universal basis, and for primary 6 and primary 7 pupils who are eligible for the Scottish child payment. We will deliver that in this parliamentary session.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I really do not know why Scottish National Party members are applauding that, because it was a very long answer that did not address my specific point. I will try again. Does John Swinney commit now to deliver the pledge, which he made as education secretary, to deliver free school meals to all primary school pupils by the end of this parliamentary session? That was a simple question that can surely get a simple yes-or-no answer.

Let me ask about another pledge that the SNP made to the poorest children in Scotland. This year’s exam results showed that, at higher level, the attainment gap is wider than ever. As education secretary, John Swinney vowed to eradicate the attainment gap completely, yet John Swinney the First Minister’s bold ambition is merely to seek to reduce it—and he is even failing at that. Is he proud that his legacy will be Scotland’s poorest children falling further behind?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is facing very challenging financial times. Yesterday, I set out that we will deliver on our commitment to ensure that free school meals are available for primary 6 and primary 7 pupils who are eligible for the Scottish child payment.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It should be for all primary 6 and all primary 7 pupils.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We will not be able, in this parliamentary session, to roll out universal eligibility across primary 6 and primary 7 pupils, because our budget has been eroded by the fiscal mismanagement and the sky-high inflation that Douglas Ross was party to creating as part of his support for the United Kingdom Government.

On the question of the attainment gap, the Scottish Government has given steadfast support to the education system through the delivery of the Scottish attainment challenge and the provision of pupil equity funding. What do we see? We see that, among young people who are leaving school and going into positive destinations, the attainment gap has reduced by 60 per cent. That is transformational for the lives of young people in Scotland, and I am glad that the Scottish Government has delivered on those commitments.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I am glad that, at my second attempt, I was able to get an honest answer out of John Swinney. He has confirmed that the SNP is breaking its promise to deliver free school meals to all primary school pupils in Scotland. That is movement from the position of his Deputy First Minister, who, when asked about it on the radio just this morning, suggested that it might still be possible and that the Government would do so during this session of Parliament if budgets allowed. John Swinney has ruled that out. He is now announcing to people across Scotland that the promise that he made as education secretary—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Ross.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

—in asking people to support the SNP in order to get it into government has now been broken. Eradicating the attainment gap was supposed to be the SNP’s number 1 priority, but the gap is as wide as ever. Now it is clear that the top priority of eradicating child poverty is going to go the same way, because the First Minister has just announced that the Government has abandoned its pledge to provide free school meals for all.

For 17 years, this Government has overpromised and underdelivered for Scotland’s children. No one will believe yet another SNP empty promise to add to the pile.

This week’s programme for government was supposed to be John Swinney’s big relaunch, but instead we got more of the same from an SNP Government that is out of ideas and out of ambition. Are broken promises such as the one that John Swinney has just announced today the best that he has to offer Scotland’s children?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

My commitment to eradicating child poverty is steadfast in the programme for government, and the Government is putting in the resources to make sure that we can achieve that objective. More than £400 million has been spent on the Scottish child payment, which is keeping 100,000 children out of poverty. That is what is happening on this Government’s watch. We have a lower child poverty rate in Scotland—it is far too high for my liking, but it has been made worse by 14 years of the folly and actions of the Conservative Government.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Your choices and your decisions.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As usual, Douglas Ross, from his front-bench seat, shouts and interrupts me, and he says that it is my choices.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

You’re getting angry.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Ross!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Yes, it is my choice, Mr Ross. It is my choice to make sure that we invest in the future of Scotland, which the Conservative Government destroyed with the austerity agenda that was supported by all the Conservative members over there.

What the people of Scotland will hear from this Government is a determination to ensure that we deliver on our commitments to lift children out of poverty, whereas the Tories have made the situation worse.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Before we move to question 2, I remind members of the requirement that they conduct themselves in a courteous and respectful manner, and that includes respecting the authority of the Presiding Officer when they are asked to desist from behaviour that is neither.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I take the opportunity to welcome the election of a new United Kingdom Labour Government and to congratulate Keir Starmer on becoming Prime Minister. I am sure that all members in the chamber will want to congratulate all of Scotland’s MPs, new or returning, regardless of their party, who have been elected to represent and deliver for the people of Scotland.

Yesterday, the First Minister outlined his programme for government—a statement with no vision, no strategy and no plan. Nowhere was that more glaring than it was for our national health service. On the Government’s watch, more than 864,000 Scots are on an NHS waiting list, which is one in six people across the country. The two previous First Ministers promised a catch-up plan and things got worse, but this First Minister did not even mention it. Unbelievably, despite growing demand and lengthening waiting lists, our NHS is performing 50,000 fewer operations a year than it did before the pandemic.

By what date does John Swinney expect patients to receive the standard of care that they deserve and that they are legally entitled to?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I echo Anas Sarwar’s words of welcome for Keir Starmer as the new Prime Minister. The Prime Minister telephoned me on the day of his election and he came to see me on the Sunday after the election. I very much welcome the efforts that the Prime Minister has made to create a better relationship between the Scottish Government and the United Kingdom Government—[ Interruption .] Frankly, it couldnae have been any worse than it was before, but I acknowledge that effort. There have been a series of other engagements, and on some of the really significant issues that both Governments are wrestling with, there has been deep engagement, which I welcome. The Scottish Government will engage in all of that activity.

We face significant challenges in the NHS, as Mr Sarwar knows. The programme for government set out a range of interventions that we are making—this is where Mr Sarwar was incorrect in his question—to reduce waiting times in the NHS, expand the capacity for undertaking treatment and improve performance in a number of key areas, particularly diagnostic information. I put on the record yesterday information about cancer diagnosis, which is significant in improving the outcomes for individuals in Scotland.

We are working very hard to overcome the waiting lists that have been created as a consequence of Covid, and the health service is being resourced to enable it to do so.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the First Minister for that answer, but I do not think that he understands that waiting lists are actually getting longer. Let us take a single example. Mark Rodgers is a former footballer. Mark has had prostate problems for years. In April, he was told that he needed urgent surgery, and he has been using a catheter for five months when it was only meant to be for weeks. He is in unbearable pain and has been having suicidal thoughts. Despite being told that his treatment is urgent, he has been told that he could have to wait for over another year. He said:

“I’m in constant threat of the life-threatening side effects and potential organ damage ... I haven’t acted on my suicidal thoughts, but I’m terrified where depression is leading me.”

NHS Lothian has confirmed that it will not meet the treatment time guarantee for Mark and has apologised. However, saying sorry does not cut waiting lists, so when will the Government stop failing Mark and the thousands of patients like him?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I am sorry about the detail that Mr Sarwar puts on the record on behalf of Mark Rodgers. If Mr Sarwar wishes to pass particular details to me, I will explore the case and determine whether anything more can be done to support the treatment of Mr Rodgers.

It is important to put on record the fact that we are still dealing with the aftermath of the Covid pandemic. We are resourcing the health service to a greater degree than would have been possible had we simply replicated the financial settlement from the United Kingdom Government. That has come about as a consequence of the decisions that the Government in Scotland has taken about taxation. We have asked those on higher incomes to contribute slightly more in taxes and we have invested a large proportion of that amount in the national health service.

I give Mr Sarwar the assurance that the Government will continue to invest in the national health service to expand capacity. We are trying to deliver the treatment that individuals require as timeously as possible. There are many examples of that happening, but I accept—and Mr Sarwar has put such a case on the record—that there will be cases in which that has not happened. I will endeavour to do all that I can to resolve those issues on behalf of Mr Rodgers and patients like him.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The frustrating thing is that, week after week, the First Minister says sorry. Week after week, those sorrys do not cut waiting lists and people are still failed by the Government.

Mark is just one example among thousands of examples right across our NHS, which is in crisis. The statistics are so bad and the stories of patient failure are so regular that it feels as though the Government has become desensitised to the crisis. Some 37,000 Scots who are now on a waiting list for an operation have already waited for more than a year. Right now, almost 5,000 children are waiting for mental health care. Thousands of families have already been forced to empty their savings or borrow money to pay for private care, all while the NHS carries out 50,000 fewer operations a year.

Can the First Minister not see that behind every one of those cases is a patient in pain, an anxious family and a workforce at breaking point, and that we need a Government in Scotland that is serious about saving our NHS so that it is there for people when they need it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I reassure Mr Sarwar that nobody in the Government—certainly not me and certainly not the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care—is desensitised to the scale of the challenge. We are very much focused on improving the performance of the national health service.

One of the examples that Mr Sarwar cited was children’s access to mental health services. Stronger performance is being delivered there, and I welcome that. That has come about because of the commitment and dedication of staff and the ability to expand the capacity to do that work.

We are taking steps to improve capacity in the health service. On cancer, for example, there is strong performance in terms of the median waits for individuals to receive treatment. Obviously, there will be people who wait longer—I accept that—but we are trying to reduce those waiting times as quickly as we possibly can. Doing so will remain the focus of policy making and decision making in the Scottish Government, and it commands the full attention of the health secretary and myself.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Free school meals for all primary school children were a commitment that the Scottish Greens secured back in 2021. That was being delivered when we were in government. The policy right up until April this year was to universally roll out meals to all children in primary 6 and 7 by 2026.

The Scottish Greens champion free school meals for all because we know that getting school meals to all kids is an effective way to mitigate the impacts of and stigma around child poverty. Yet, as soon as the Greens are out of the room, the Scottish Government drops the policy. Can the First Minister therefore explain how we are supposed to take seriously his commitment to tackling child poverty?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is facing acute financial challenges because of the persistence of the austerity agenda and the cumulative effect of inflation, which have eroded our budgets by a value of about one fifth in the past three years, and because we are having to find about £800 million in this financial year to meet public sector pay claims.

Lorna Slater will know from her experience in government that, once the financial year starts, the Government cannot expand the resources that are available to it. We have a fixed sum of money available to us once the financial year starts. All that we can do is either receive consequential funding from the United Kingdom Government, which might expand those resources, or reallocate resources within the budget.

The Government has reluctantly undertaken to take some decisions that will ensure that free school meals are available to young people whose families are in receipt of the Scottish child payment, which absolutely focuses our work on tackling poverty at a time when we are facing acute financial pressure. That is the difficult decision that the Government has had to make.

Lorna Slater will appreciate from her period in government that the Government regularly has to face up to difficult financial choices, particularly given the persistence of the austerity climate that we thought we had seen the back of with the Conservatives.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

During our time in government, the Scottish Greens scrapped peak rail fares and introduced a groundbreaking fund to restore nature and create jobs across rural Scotland. We introduced legislation for a robust system of rent controls. We were on track to ban conversion practices and roll out free bus travel to asylum seekers. All that work is being undone, slashed, watered down or shelved, and now there is the betrayal of free school meals.

The message of this week’s programme for government is that, if people want progressive green policies, they need to vote to have Greens in the room. What does the First Minister have to say to voters who backed those policies and now feel let down?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Lorna Slater’s question gives me the opportunity to make clear that the Government is progressing with the legislation to ban conversion therapy in Scotland. However, we think it a pragmatic step to work with the United Kingdom Government to determine whether there is a UK-wide approach to that, which would enable us to avoid some of the difficulties in which we found ourselves in relation to the gender recognition legislation. That is not walking away from the commitment to end conversion therapy but is a pragmatic step to try to avoid some of the legislative difficulties in which the Parliament found itself in relation to gender recognition. I hope that that provides some degree of reassurance.

Lorna Slater asked me what my message is to people at this particular time. We can look at that in a number of ways. The Government has put in place, agreed and supported pay deals that will lift families out of poverty. Household incomes will increase substantially and poverty will be eroded because of the above-inflation pay increases that the Government is prepared to sanction. Although I understand the anguish that people feel about those choices, I cannot spend the same money twice.

The Government believes that avoiding industrial action in our public services, so that we can address the issues that Mr Sarwar has—fairly—put to me about the performance of the health service, by ensuring that we deliver pay deals that are commensurate is important. However, at the same time as delivering those pay deals in a fixed budget, I cannot afford some of the policy commitments that I would dearly love to introduce, because we are still bound by the shackles of austerity.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

To ask the First Minister what analysis the Scottish Government is undertaking of any impact that reductions to winter fuel payments will have on people in Scotland. (S6F-03302)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Our analysis suggests that between 110,000 and 130,000 pensioners will remain eligible for a payment in Scotland this winter, which is a reduction of around 900,000 pensioners. The United Kingdom Government’s decision to restrict eligibility for winter fuel payments, which was taken without any consultation with the Scottish Government, will have a devastating impact on the pension age winter heating payment. It represents a 90 per cent cut to our devolved budget for delivering a universal payment and is another example of Scotland being at the mercy of Westminster decisions, because we are left with no choice but to follow the UK Government’s decision.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Of my Aberdeen Central constituents, 9,078 are pensioners, and many of them are living in poverty. They are worried about the impact on them of Labour austerity. Does the First Minister share my view that Labour’s brutal cutting of winter fuel payments is not only an attack on older people but an attack on devolution, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer showed no interest whatever in consulting the Scottish Government ahead of her decision?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Kevin Stewart makes an absolutely valid point about the impact of the winter fuel payment cut. There will be pensioners who are not in an affluent position and who will be suffering significantly as a consequence of the cut. There was a commitment from the incoming Labour Government to reduce fuel bills by an average of £300. In fact, people will see their fuel bills increase by an average of £149, which will compound the damage that will be done to those pensioners. I do not underestimate the scale of the difficulty. If there was an alternative, I would have liked to have taken it, but Mr Stewart will appreciate, from his experience in Government, that I cannot, as much as I would like, find £160 million to enable us to continue that payment on a universal basis.

On the intergovernmental relations question, I accept that decisions get taken abruptly by Governments. Sometimes, my Government has to do that, too. I encourage the United Kingdom Government to engage in deeper dialogue with the Scottish Government as we try to resolve the very difficult circumstances that we all face.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the recently published report, “Education Outcomes for Looked After Children 2022/23”. (S6F-03289)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government is resolute in our commitment to keep the Promise. The attainment gap between care-experienced school leavers and all children has been narrowing at all levels since 2009-10. That gap continues to narrow at the highest levels of achievement and, for lower-level qualifications, it remains narrower than it was pre-Covid.

Although overall figures indicate that there is more to be done on exclusions and attendance, with support through the care-experienced children and young people fund and the virtual headteacher network we have seen real successes in those areas in schools across Scotland. Working with Education Scotland, local government and The Promise Scotland, we must learn and build on that work to continue to improve outcomes for children and young people with care experience.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the First Minister for that response, but I am surprised. The key findings of the report are deeply concerning. Educational attainment has fallen, school attendance rates are declining and the exclusion rate for looked-after children has risen for the first time in 12 years and is almost six times the exclusion rate for all pupils. Despite the commitments of the Promise, which, for example, include a promise to scrap the exclusions for care-experienced children, it is clear from the report that the Scottish Government is failing in that mission.

The chances of success of young people throughout Scotland are increasingly being determined by their circumstances, which is shameful. What has gone wrong? What more will the Government do to ensure that our care-experienced community gets what was promised?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government’s commitment to the Promise is absolute. I was in Government when the commitment was originally given, and it will remain steadfast in any Government that I lead.

However, I also recognise the challenges that we face in this regard. Just at the start of the school year, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills published the steps that have been taken in relation to behaviour and attendance in our schools, because we recognise—prompted by constructive discussion in the Parliament—that, in the Covid aftermath, there are significant implications in relation to school attendance and behaviour as a consequence of Covid’s disruptive effect. That affects all young people, and it will have an effect on care-experienced young people into the bargain.

Our focus on addressing those issues will continue. There are, of course, other aspects of work that we are doing that are being implemented as part of our commitment to the Promise. One of them was the enactment of the provisions of the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024, which ends the placement of children in young offenders institutions in Scotland. I am glad that that came into force on 28 August, and I am deeply grateful to everybody across our system who has made that possible. That is just one other commitment in the Promise that the Government has delivered, and we will deliver more.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

More concise questions and responses will enable more members to have an opportunity to put questions.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

The gap in secondary school attendance rates between looked-after pupils and all pupils has widened to eight percentage points in 2022-23. That means that actions that have been taken previously have not made a positive difference in getting those young people to school. What specifically will the First Minister change to get attendance for care-experienced young people up?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise the point that Mr Whitfield makes. Some measures are contained in the work that I set out in my original answer to Roz McCall. We will try to ensure that we maintain young people’s engagement in education in all circumstances. Obviously, attendance would be desirable and ideal—

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Essential.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Whitfield shouts to say that it is essential. I would like it to be essential, which would be ideal, but there are other ways of reaching children with education, such as by taking their education to them, if there is a difficulty in getting them into school. That is part of the measures that are being exhausted to ensure that we establish the connection with young people to maintain their education. That approach will lie at the heart of the steps that we take.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking in response to reports that newly qualified nurses are unable to find employment in the national health service despite there being over 3,300 whole-time equivalent unfilled nursing and midwifery vacancies. (S6F-03298)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government hugely values the work of nurses and midwives. We continue to support our health boards to ensure that graduates can secure jobs in available roles in the national health service, and we work with boards to ensure that we reinforce their commitment to maximising the opportunities for newly qualified nurses to find employment.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Just yesterday, the First Minister promised women more support from pregnancy through birth, yet, in the past few weeks, my office has been inundated with emails from distressed midwifery graduates and newly qualified paediatric nurses who are unable to get jobs.

Workforce planning needs to deliver safe staffing levels, yet hundreds of midwives and paediatric nurses are unemployed this year when we know that there are serious staff shortages. At least £12 million has been spent on their training, but cuts and vacancy freezes mean that they do not have jobs. Existing staff are burnt out and are leaving, patient outcomes are worse and the Government is in breach of its own legislation on safe staffing.

Is this yet another case of Scottish National Party financial incompetence, with the First Minister’s words yesterday just empty rhetoric, or will he act to ensure that these nurses fill the vacancies that we know exist in midwifery and paediatrics?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I want to ensure that the skills and talents of individuals are properly used in our health service. Under this Government, the number of qualified nurses and midwives has increased by 16.1 per cent. In paediatric nursing, the number of qualified nurses has also increased—it is up by 1.7 per cent in the past year. Across qualified midwife jobs, there has been an increase of 4.5 per cent in the past year. Those are some of the commitments that we are delivering.

As I said in my original answer, I want to encourage health boards to ensure that they have the resources and staffing available to deliver the services and support that I talked about in the programme for government statement yesterday. I recognise that constancy and consistency of support is essential in supporting women during pregnancy, and I want to ensure that the best outcomes can be achieved by that approach.

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

I am sure that members, including Jackie Baillie, will welcome the First Minister’s comments about the fact that the number of nursing and midwifery posts has increased by 4.5 per cent since last year. What further steps are being taken, in particular by the nursing and midwifery task force, to ensure that qualified nurses continue to be supported through the hiring process?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The nursing and midwifery task force is working collaboratively with stakeholders, including the Royal College of Nursing and the Royal College of Midwives, to develop actions that will help us to build a sustainable, attractive and respected nursing and midwifery workforce. That is the workforce planning that is being undertaken, which I was asked about a moment ago.

As part of the task force’s activity, the work plan will be shaped by the voices of the current and future nursing and midwifery workforce. We expect the final report and the work plan to be published later this year.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency questions and general supplementaries.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Yesterday’s exclusive article in The Courier made it very clear that, to date, the Scottish Government has not had any engagement with the Libyan authorities about the disgraced surgeon Professor Eljamel, but it also put it on record that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has now suggested that that might be possible. Could the First Minister confirm that that is the case?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Obviously, there is widespread concern about the Eljamel case, which is the subject of a public inquiry that is under way. The health secretary is looking carefully at the issue to determine what approach we can take to ensure that any of the concerns that have been raised in the news article can be addressed as effectively as possible and that any of the information that we hold can be made available to the Libyan authorities as appropriate.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

The First Minister will share my astonishment that the United Kingdom Labour Government has shamefully cut £140 million to £160 million in winter fuel payments to Scottish pensioners this year, while reportedly providing the Scotland Office with a similar sum—£150 million—with which to undermine devolution. What does the First Minister believe that that says about Labour’s priorities and its approach to and respect for Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I was surprised by those reports, because I thought that we would be entering an era in which, after the damage that was done to the powers of the Scottish Parliament by the most recent Conservative Government in the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the Subsidy Control Act 2022—damage that was resisted by the Labour Party while it was in opposition—we would see those provisions being reversed. It would be a good thing if those provisions were to be reversed, because they directly erode the powers of this Parliament. The public were never asked. Brexit was used as an excuse for eroding the powers of this Parliament.

Where there is proper and effective devolution, this Parliament should have the responsibility to take forward work in those areas for which it has responsibility. It should not be possible for those powers to be undermined by the actions of the United Kingdom Government. I hope that the UK Government will take the lead from Mr Gibson’s question and reverse those undesirable provisions.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I know that the First Minister will want to join me in welcoming today’s superb news of the provision by the new United Kingdom Labour Government of £30 million of funding for life sciences research at the University of Dundee. That research work is extraordinary and vital. It is delivering breakthroughs in the treatment of skin cancer, and there is now the prospect of the new funding advancing the fight against Parkinson’s and Crohn’s disease.

The University of Dundee has been the leading life sciences university in the UK for two decades, and I know that the Parliament will want to recognise that. Does the First Minister agree that the diversity of our world-leading universities across Scotland is a vital national strength? What can he do to continue to support that work and the diversity of all our universities in conducting groundbreaking research in science?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As Mr Marra will not be surprised to hear, I am very familiar with the life sciences work of the University of Dundee. Over my parliamentary career, it has been my privilege to talk about the issue on many occasions with individuals such as Professor Mike Ferguson, who has done such superb work in developing the resources at the University of Dundee. Of course, that work has been built on very strong foundations over many years. The University of Dundee has taken a significant role in life science research over many years. It is an area of critical strength that has attracted a lot of support from Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Government for many years. The Deputy First Minister visited those facilities in the summer. I wish the University of Dundee every success and the Government will work collaboratively to ensure that that is enhanced.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

The First Minister will be aware of reports that more than 400 jobs are at risk at the Mitsubishi Electric plant in Livingston. That announcement could have a significant social and economic impact for my constituents in neighbouring Edinburgh Pentlands and beyond. Will the First Minister outline what engagement the Scottish Government has had with Mitsubishi and what support is in place for those who are at risk of redundancy?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I was concerned to hear the reports about the proposals from Mitsubishi Electric. The factory is a significant and highly specialised asset in Scotland, and it is one that I have visited in the past. The Minister for Employment and Investment has spoken with Mitsubishi Electric to understand the rationale behind the company’s position. Scottish Enterprise is working closely with the company to consider all viable options. If we reach a point where there is any loss of employment, we will, of course, be in a position to support employees, but the intervention by Scottish Enterprise is designed to create a pathway to avoid that situation. The focused activities of Scottish Enterprise will be at the company’s disposal in order to avoid any loss of employment.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Residents of New Cumnock have raised concerns about raw sewage being dumped in the area, under the guise of a land restoration project. Locals believe that to be a health and safety hazard that is contaminating watercourses and affecting businesses, forcing them to close their doors due to the stench. This is not the first time that the issue of waste dumping has been raised in the area. I have been raising the issue of Tarbolton Moss landfill site for more than three years, but little progress has been made. I therefore ask the First Minister what checks are made on land that has been designated for restoration projects and what measures are in place to ensure that discarded waste materials comply with regulations?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Sharon Dowey has put on the record some very concerning points that sound to me to be wholly unacceptable. The regulatory authorities—Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency—should undertake scrutiny of those issues, along with the local authority. If Sharon Dowey would like to furnish me with more information, I will certainly raise it with the relevant regulatory authorities, because her constituents should not have to endure that experience.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Human rights organisations such as the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Amnesty and the Human Rights Consortium have described the Government’s abandonment of human rights legislation during this session of Parliament as “disappointing”, “unjustifiable” and “a breach of trust”. That is coupled with the apparent abandonment of the Learning Disabilities, Autism and Neurodivergence Bill and with decisions such as the one to reprofile £10 million of money for changing places toilets. What does the First Minister think that that says to disabled people? What does he think it says more widely to people whose human rights are often most at risk? What will his Government do about that?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government takes a number of steps to ensure that rights and support for disabled people are taken forward. During the summer, along with the Minister for Equalities, I met the Glasgow Disability Alliance and a number of other organisations representing people with disabilities and we had a very open conversation about some of the issues that must be addressed. I assure Mr O’Kane, and stakeholders, that the Government take those issues very seriously and will take all practical steps that we can to address the issues that are of concern.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Parents, carers and pupils in Motherwell and Wishaw have repeatedly raised concerns after the Labour administration in North Lanarkshire, with support from the Conservatives, cut school transport provision. I share those concerns, having walked some of those routes with families and watched Sean Ferrie’s brilliant video about his walk to school, detailing the hazards that he will face if that cut is rolled out to primary schools, as planned, next year. What processes are in place for parents, carers and pupils to challenge decisions on safety grounds and to challenge the local authority’s refusal to review those walking routes?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues at stake here are properly a matter for the local authority to determine, but it has a duty to make the arrangements that it considers necessary for the transport of pupils between home and school and to have regard to their safety. That commitment is a significant element of the guidance that is available, which has to be addressed by the local authority. The local authority’s engagement processes should be designed to ensure that parents and carers can make representations where they are concerned about the safety of their children, and the local authority should take those seriously.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

As the First Minister will be aware, since plans for a new Galloway national park were announced over the summer, there has been significant and growing opposition to the proposal, which now spills into my Dumfriesshire constituency. Many fear that this promises to be yet another example of urban do-gooders imposing their sanitised, overregulated idea of the countryside on already fragile rural and agricultural communities. The proposal is not supported by the local NFU Scotland branch, and hundreds of people are concerned about what is planned. Can the First Minister give a guarantee today that, if local people say no to the proposal, it will not go ahead?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There is an aspiration for there to be national parks. Part of my constituency is in a national park, and a lot of good work is undertaken there. The process of taking forward the proposals in relation to a Galloway national park requires engagement and consultation, and the Government stands ready to undertake that dialogue and discussion. We will listen to the points that are put forward by Mr Mundell and his constituents who are affected and the process will come to its conclusion. I simply encourage anyone who has a view to express about the proposal to take part in the consultation process.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s questions. Before we move to the next item of business, there will be a short suspension to allow people to leave the chamber and the public gallery.

United Nations Declaration on Future Generations

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-14137, in the name of Sarah Boyack, on recognising the UN’s Declaration on Future Generations. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament recognises the UN’s Declaration on Future Generations, a document launched in relation to the UN’s Summit of the Future in September 2024; acknowledges the calls urging Scotland to be governed with future generations and their interests in mind; notes the belief that Scotland must commit to playing its part to seize the global opportunity that present generations possess to leave a better future for generations to come, and further notes calls to advance the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, including in the Lothian region, in order to build strong and resilient foundations to achieve this.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I thank colleagues for supporting my motion and enabling the debate, and I welcome Alasdair Allan to his ministerial role.

This month, the United Nations will host a summit of the future, which is being described as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reinvigorate global action. People from around the world will gather together to wrestle with one of the most important questions of our time: what can we do now to build a planet that survives and thrives for the generations that follow us? That is an essential question that every parliamentarian should ask themselves, and it must reframe how we see the way we legislate, the actions that we take and the priorities that we pursue.

As part of the summit, attendees will vote on the Declaration on Future Generations. The declaration’s message is clear: we have a responsibility for future generations. The declaration also stresses the importance of the UN’s sustainable development goals. By prioritising those, we can do the vital work that is needed to protect future generations. The goals call on all nations to work for education, peace, health and wellbeing, to preserve nature, eradicate poverty and establish equality for all. However, we have to work together and use the powers and leadership of our Parliament to deliver the action to make those goals a reality.

Lack of action will have an intergenerational multiplier effect. Mistakes made now will be paid for long after we are gone, but positive decisions that we make today could have a cumulative effect on wellbeing long into the future. We have an opportunity as a Parliament to future proof the foundations of our country and to build wellbeing and sustainability into all our policy and planning. Our every action can be taken with a big picture in mind, and we could leave a remarkable legacy behind.

Scotland will not be alone in that. Increasingly, the whole world is realising the need for global action that plans for a bright and sustainable future. I have seen it working. The inspiring discussions that we had in Vilnius last year at the congress on the future of the world gave me the chance to hear at first hand about the action that is being taken by parliamentarians across the world. We now know that several countries are acting with long-term intergenerational goals in mind. Kenya is developing an intergenerational fairness assessment tool, and we are seeing action in Mexico, Costa Rica and New Zealand. Closer to home, we are seeing action in other European Parliaments. For example, just last year, the Parliament of the Balearic Islands approved a law for the wellbeing of the present and future generations, and, at a European Union level, Ursula von der Leyen intends to appoint a commissioner with responsibilities for intergenerational fairness.

The world increasingly recognises that we have the power to shape the world for the better and to do it for centuries to come, but in Scotland we are not quite there yet, and we are currently missing the opportunity presented to us.

Fantastic work is being done by a range of groups, such as the Wellbeing Economy Alliance Scotland, Scotland’s International Development Alliance and Carnegie UK, and we have a meeting of our cross-party group on wellbeing tomorrow morning. However, an important report that was produced by Carnegie UK highlighted that Scotland is falling behind in integrating wellbeing frameworks. It stated:

“we could not locate a single national policy in Scotland that the NPF has significantly impacted.”

Worse, it also stated:

“Scotland now cuts a diminished figure on an international stage of wellbeing-focussed governments it helped establish.”

The one glimmer of hope that was highlighted in the Carnegie paper was the Scottish Government’s commitment to a wellbeing and sustainability bill that would enshrine in law the requirement to consider those factors across every area of legislation. However, disappointingly, when the programme for government was announced yesterday, the bill was conspicuously absent. That is bad news for future generations and flies in the face of a global movement towards sustainable development. If action is not taken, Scotland will continue to fall behind in legislation that builds a sustainable future.

Colleagues may be aware that I have a solution. My proposed member’s bill on wellbeing and sustainable development has established cross-party support and is in the stages of being drafted. More than 150 organisations pushed hard before the 2021 elections for greater action in this area. The time for action is now. We can embed the priorities of wellbeing and sustainability in everything that we do as a Parliament, and my bill would ensure that that happens.

I know that the Scottish Government has been working on the issue. It is a vital and hugely popular idea. I hope that the Scottish Government will whole-heartedly support my bill because too often we see short-term decisions. For example, using the ScotWind income to plug a gap in this year’s finances is exactly the kind of action that jeopardises future generations.

Scotland desperately needs a sustainable development framework that allows us to tackle deep-rooted problems, including fuel poverty, poor health and lack of economic opportunity. We urgently need joined-up action to tackle our climate and nature emergencies.

Experience in Wales shows that legislation, with a commissioner focused on delivery, can be transformative, giving leadership, security and guidance.

John Mason (Independent, Glasgow Shettleston)

I have been listening to what the member is saying, and I am very much in support of the vast majority of it. She has mentioned a commissioner, and she may know that the Finance and Public Administration Committee has been carrying out an inquiry into commissioners. There is concern that we now have more and more commissioners, and that that could divert money away from front-line services. How would she respond to that?

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I go back to my point about the experience in Wales, where the legislation was established in 2016. The commissioner who was established there has not just given leadership but has delivered savings and has enabled cross-government work. That is critical, and we urgently need that in Scotland. It is not just about having a commissioner for the sake of the name; it is about transforming decisions, priorities and funding now, because that will benefit not just future generations but our constituents and our communities now. Let us get on with it.

There is a global opportunity here, colleagues, one that the UN’s Declaration on Future Generations recognises. It is an opportunity to change the future for good. However, I go back to my earlier point. If we delay now and pursue sticking-plaster politics instead of robust action that works for a brighter, happier future, tomorrow’s generations will be the ones who pick up the bill. That is not fair and it is not right.

We have a duty to those who will follow us and, as the United Nations meets to declare its commitment for future generations, let us play our part and deliver the transformation that our world urgently needs.

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

I welcome the debate. I thank Sarah Boyack for lodging her motion and for bringing the debate to the chamber. I note the focus in her remarks and in the briefings that we have received in advance of the debate from many stakeholders, on prioritisation, on the history of action on these matters from the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament in recent years, and on building a greater wellbeing economy and society here in Scotland. That has included being part of the initial number of countries in the growing wellbeing economy Governments partnership, known as WEGo: New Zealand, Iceland, Finland, Wales, Canada and, of course, Scotland. I remember, during the time when I had the privilege of being Minister for Europe, Migration and International Development for the Scottish Government, speaking with the Finnish Government as it looked to join the group, and it was great to see Finland become part of it thereafter.

In Scotland, we have the national performance framework, which is considered by all areas of government and more widely, and concerns the allocation of resources and how we make progress to build a greater wellbeing economy and society. I think that it should be called the wellbeing performance framework, which would be more accessible. Perhaps, if there is an opportunity for a name change at some point, that might help with the engagement that is happening more widely than the work of the statutory services and stakeholders who are involved every day.

I appreciate the points that Sarah Boyack made about specific legislation and the support for that idea from different stakeholders, including Aileen McLeod, who was a member of this Parliament and of the European Parliament. She has argued that everyone should have the opportunity to live a good and dignified life, both now and in the future, and that we need to think about how we get clarity in a situation with competing goals. That has been on my mind over recent months and years, and it is particularly pertinent in this 25th year of devolution. Here in Scotland and elsewhere in other democracies, we are facing a challenge in the mixture of our political culture and the demands that are facing all societies—including ours—in relation to public sector service delivery, economic competitiveness, climate change and greater global insecurity. The question of how to react to that multi-challenge in a reasonable and considered way that is deliverable for the people we serve is really difficult.

I am open minded about the possibility of legislating, whether through a member’s bill or in the next parliamentary session. However, as is the case in a number of other areas where we have legislated, we need to focus more passionately and more determinedly on the political culture and the delivery of legislation. If we do not change the political culture and set goals that we all agree on rather than seeing everything as a political opportunity, we will not make progress on the really big issues, whether in Scotland or at an international level.

Sarah Boyack talked about sticking-plaster politics. All parties have been engaged in sticking-plaster politics or in calling for such politics. There was a lot of sticking-plaster politics in the reaction to the programme for government yesterday—sweeping statements and criticism, rather than firm ideas for improvement.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

The point about short-term versus long-term decisions is important, but the experience of the Welsh commissioner—we are now on to the second commissioner—shows that scrutiny and hard work, and not just speeches in Parliament, are critical. We do not have that approach at the moment.

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

I take the point. There is also the point about commissioners that was made earlier. More importantly, we can take recommendations from commissioners, have strategies from Government and have law and policy, but our political culture needs to change if we are to address long-term challenges. That is a big challenge for all of us in the Parliament in the 25th year since its reconvening.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I congratulate Sarah Boyack on securing this debate on the UN Declaration on Future Generations. I also welcome Alasdair Allan to his new ministerial role.

We are all united in wanting to leave a better world for our children. Right now, that can seem a daunting task as humanity faces a multitude of problems, from conflicts and economic uncertainty to climate change and biodiversity loss. I will focus on environmental degradation, not least because it underpins many of the challenges that future generations might face, from resource scarcity and extreme weather to health impacts.

Scotland is already one of the most depleted countries on earth, with an astonishing one in nine species at risk of extinction, according to the “State of Nature Scotland 2023” report. Our economy continues to rely on extracting and consuming new resources. It is just 1.3 per cent circular, according to “The Circularity Gap Report”. We continue to pump out far too many greenhouse gases. The targets for reducing those have been missed in nine out of the past 13 years.

Tackling those issues now would be one of the biggest gifts that we could give to future generations. It is like saving for your child’s future. If you start when they are born, you can watch small efforts compound and grow, but, if you wait until they have grown up, you simply do not have as much time to help them.

The draft declaration makes that point in the preamble, when it recognises

“that our decisions, actions, and inactions today, have an intergenerational multiplier effect, such that our conduct today will impact future generations exponentially, and therefore emphasizing that present generations, carry a responsibility towards future generations to act with their interests in mind”.

If we want those exponential effects to be positive ones, we have to act now. The good news is that we all recognise that fact. I have always applauded the ambition that the Scottish Government has shown on tackling climate change, but ambition is nothing without delivery, and I am afraid to say that that is not happening.

I have already spoken about missed targets, but there have also been missed opportunities. Let us consider the Circular Economy (Scotland) Act 2024. That was our chance to kick-start a truly sustainable economy that would conserve resources for future generations, create jobs and wealth that are not easily offshored and keep us on track to meet our environmental goals. However, the Scottish Government seemed to prefer a watered-down bill that focused on shorter-term goals, such as those on littering and recycling. Both those issues are important, but neither will lead to the long-term structural changes that we need.

The same short-term approach was on display during the past fortnight as the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government cut millions of pounds from climate and nature budgets to plug holes in the overall budget. That approach will just compound problems further down the line, with future generations having to work harder and pay more to deal with them. As it happens, the draft declaration mentions the need for intergenerational dialogue in decision making. I hope that the Scottish Government pays attention to that—the prosperity of future generations depends on it.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank Sarah Boyack for lodging this important motion for debate in the chamber, as well as those across the chamber who supported it. I echo others in welcoming Alasdair Allan to his new position.

The UN’s Declaration on Future Generations asks us all to govern with future generations in mind. It recognises, as we must, that the decisions, actions and inactions of present generations have an intergenerational multiplier effect. The decisions that we make today, along with our discussions, debates and votes, as well as the politicking that Ben Macpherson mentioned, will all affect not only current generations but those that come after them.

I will take some time to talk about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The decisions that any Government in Scotland makes must now, by law, take into account and fully consider the rights of the child. That is an incredible responsibility. The Declaration on Future Generations reminds us that it is not just today’s children whose rights we must consider; we must also consider tomorrow’s children. That calls on the Government and politicians to go beyond short-term decision making, such as raiding ScotWind’s fund to balance the budget. We need long-term solutions, capital investment in the green industries of tomorrow and a national health service that will outlive us. We need to build safe, warm and affordable houses that will last, and we need an education system that meets the needs of our young people and equips them to build a future for those who will come after them. We need real action to get rid of not just the symptoms of poverty but poverty itself and all its roots.

We are quite used to hearing promises of jam tomorrow in lieu of jam today. However, young people have a genuine concern that there might not be a tomorrow. A significant number of them share that fear, which feeds into their learning, their desires and their outreach to politicians about their concerns for tomorrow. Long-term decision making is not popular.

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

Mr Whitfield makes an important point. Does he agree that we have a collective responsibility not only to hear, register and act on young people’s fears but to work together to give young people in our country and elsewhere a sense that the future can be better and ensure that we take forward policies that will achieve that?

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I whole-heartedly agree. There needs to be optimism and hope that there will be a better tomorrow, because there is one.

When taking decisions now, we need to consider the challenges of long-term decision making compared with short-term decision making. Politicians will ask, “What do I need to do to win an election in one year’s time or two years’ time?” rather than ask, “What do I need to do for all of us over the next 10 to 20 years that will bring benefits?” That short-termism—the type of politics that Ben Macpherson was talking about—cannot continue.

However, we have got quite used to hearing that, and we need to change the narrative of the argument. I will finish, therefore, by highlighting what I think is one of the most important lines in the declaration, because it gives us a route map to move away from that approach. It calls on us to recognise

“children and youth as agents of change”

who should

“be taken into consideration in our policy and decision-making processes in order to safeguard the needs and interests of future generations”.

I think that we need to go a step further by not simply recognising our young people as agents of change but facilitating them to be those agents, so that, in the future, as Sarah Boyack said, they are not picking up the bill from today but enjoying what we have paid forward today to benefit them tomorrow.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I thank Sarah Boyack for bringing the debate to the chamber and for her long-term commitment to this work.

It is hard to take a long view in politics. We often talk about the future of the children and young people whom we know and see, but political timescales tend to tip the balance towards considering the current electorate. However, what of those who are not yet born? The UN declaration urges us to consider them all, as it refers to being

“Cognizant that future generations are all those generations that do not yet exist, are yet to come and who will eventually inherit this planet.”

That is a sobering responsibility, which calls on us to look ahead, not just to 2026 or 2050, or even to 2100, but as far beyond as we can reasonably expect human beings to live here. Of course, the future survival of humanity depends largely on what we do now, so we need a way to assess the decisions that we make now in terms of how their impact on future generations will shape the world to come.

We need to take those responsibilities seriously, not just in politics but in wider society. To a large extent, in comparison with peoples across the earth and across time, we are cultural outliers, in that we do not do that. The UN declaration points that out, stating that:

“many social, cultural and religious or spiritual belief-based practices, as well as numerous national constitutions and legal systems exist, that seek to safeguard future generations and promote intergenerational solidarity and responsibility”.

That intergenerational solidarity—intergenerational equity—is particularly acute in relation to our earth, with its climate and biodiversity, and how we can either co-exist with or extract and exploit non-human nature. As the declaration recognises, that is more important now than ever. It says:

“our decisions, actions, and inactions today, have an intergenerational multiplier effect, such that our conduct today will impact future generations exponentially”.

That exponential impact demands serious informed consideration.

Sadly, such attention has not been a feature of Westminster politics for a long time. The Sustainable Development Commission, which was set up to do exactly that work, was abolished during the Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition’s so-called bonfire of the quangos. It will be interesting to see whether Keir Starmer’s Government chooses to reinstate the commission.

Wales responded to that piece of policy vandalism by passing the bill that became the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. From Scotland, we have watched the impacts of the 2015 act with interest, and not just a little envy. It took time, of course, for the act to make substantive change—Sophie Howe felt that it took three years for significant progress to be made. Nonetheless, its effects have been real, influencing not only individual decisions but ways of thinking and working. For example, the current Future Generations Commissioner for Wales is working on resources for long-term thinking and is tracing the links from current decisions to their impact on people’s lives as this century makes way for the next.

Another of the ways of working involves identifying a growing movement of individuals, in and beyond public services, who are pushing for change. Of course, that does not always require legislation, as the Dundee Changemakers Hub in North East Scotland shows.

Much of what the UN declaration calls for is happening in civil society, including the recognition of the need for intergenerational dialogue and engagement that is dynamically enacted here in Scotland by generations working together. However, other aspects of the declaration will need Government action if they are to be fully realised. The declaration talks of

“building a strong foundation for sustainable peace, prosperity and the protection of human rights”

as being

“the most effective way to safeguard the needs and interests of future generations”.

That is because intergenerational responsibility is not an optional extra to be added on to democracy and good governance; it should—and must—be at their heart, as a matter of justice, equity and human rights.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank Sarah Boyack for bringing this debate to the chamber. It was inspiring to hear from her about the many international examples and to hear from Maggie Chapman about how intergenerational equity is so embedded in many societies.

I will focus my comments on the practicalities of what we do here at Holyrood. This week, as we have done in every year since 1999, we are scrutinising the Government’s short-term annual policy and budget choices. Much of our work as MSPs is focused on short-term delivery, but there is a pressing need to look beyond the short term—beyond electoral cycles—and towards the needs of not only the current generations but those who have yet to be born.

The big societal challenges of this century cannot be solved with short-term, year-to-year thinking, yet, in our consideration of issues such as hospital waiting lists, there is rarely space to bottom out the long-term preventative policies that could ultimately lead to a better society. That means that we miss the opportunity to make the links between, say, health and transport or between poverty and the environment. In a Parliament that is always driven by the immediacy of crisis, it can sometimes feel indulgent to pull back and start to look at the bigger picture. That is a major reason why, years on from the Christie commission’s recommendations on public sector reform, we have yet to see meaningful progress in areas such as preventative spend. It always feels indulgent to talk about such spend when we come to budget scrutiny in committee.

In that context, having a future generations commissioner for Scotland is essential. Such a proposal was mentioned in the Bute house agreement and was being delivered by my colleague Patrick Harvie. It is good to see Sarah Boyack keeping that flag flying.

As Sophie Howe, the former Future Generations Commissioner for Wales, put it,

“The Commissioner’s role is to take a helicopter view—not necessarily getting into the nitty gritty of problems emerging in the here and now—but offering a longer-term perspective”

and

“joining the dots between issues and organisations”.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

The need for guidance and constructive collaborative work right across the public sector has become clear from feedback on and analysis of the commissioner’s work. Does Mr Ruskell agree that we are not getting that, but that we need it urgently?

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Absolutely. This is a big piece of work; it is not something that a parliamentary committee can do on its own. There is a need to equip the whole public sector to think in the long term. I know that the Welsh FGC has been focusing on the skills to plan for 25 years ahead.

I have seen at first hand the benefits of having such a commissioner in Wales. Members might remember that, in 2018, I brought forward a member’s bill to introduce a 20mph safer speed limit for built-up roads in Scotland. At the same time, Wales was considering adopting a similar approach, and I was delighted to be part of that Welsh conversation. The role of the FGC in that debate was hugely important, because she was able to draw together the long-term public health case for communities of a speed limit change. That really helped to establish the right basis for moving the issue forward in the Senedd in a cross-party and consensual way, which, with hindsight, and looking back at my member’s bill, perhaps we lacked here at Holyrood.

Of course, later on, there were those who sought to make the roll-out of the 20mph limit a political culture war in Wales. However, now that the dust has settled there, we are starting to see the long-term benefits bed in, starting with huge and dramatic reductions in road casualties on Welsh streets. That is partly down to the work of the public health sector in Wales and the Future Generations Commissioner in leading that debate.

There are many other examples of where that commissioner has been pivotal in driving reform. I understand the Finance and Public Administration Committee’s concerns about the growth in the number of commissioners more generally in Scotland, but there is good practice from Wales about how its commissioner has worked closely with Audit Wales and other commissioners to share staff, reduce costs and maximise joint working. We should learn from that in any review that the Parliament undertakes of our commissioner landscape.

I again thank Sarah Boyack for securing this debate. She reflects our shared priorities to raise the focus of the public sector on the needs of future generations and a sustainable Scotland. I wish her good luck, and I will listen closely to the words of the minister in closing.

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

I thank everyone for the nice things that they have said about me in my new job, which is a rare opportunity in which I will happily bask.

I thank Sarah Boyack for lodging the motion and securing today’s debate on the UN’s draft Declaration on Future Generations. This Government recognises the draft declaration and eagerly anticipates the summit of the future this month, so I very much welcome Ms Boyack’s drawing the issues to the fore and bringing them to the Parliament’s attention.

It has been a useful debate and, of course, were Scotland to participate in our own right as an independent UN member state, we would be able to have a much more direct input into the development of UN positions. However, even as a devolved Government, we are committed to ensuring that the interests of future generations are central to our decision making.

The upcoming summit presents an opportunity to renew international commitment to and co-operation on the UN’s 2030 agenda. Scotland remains steadfast in making our contribution to that agenda to secure a safe and prosperous world for future generations, and it is also an opportunity to take up the challenge of long-term thinking that many members rightly highlighted today.

Our goal of a sustainable wellbeing economy seeks to leave a better future for generations to come. We are devoted to the principles of a fair, green and growing wellbeing economy that reinforce our four key priorities. By addressing those priorities now, we are investing in the wellbeing of the future.

Our programme for government reaffirms our commitment to the sustainable development goals, which reflect our common vision for Scotland and beyond. They help us to keep future generations in mind, to work to deliver public services, to protect our planet and to empower people and communities.

Maggie Chapman rightly pointed to the international context. Scotland continues to be active and engaged internationally. That includes contributing to multilateral discussions and programmes on biodiversity, climate change, health, education, human rights and humanitarian crises, including working with the UN and others. The actions that are being progressed in Scotland’s international strategy will further Scotland’s contribution. That includes pioneering global action on climate justice and galvanising international agreement on a loss and damage fund.

Scotland is leading on climate action at home and abroad, including in the global south. That includes leadership roles as president of Regions4 and co-chair of the Under2 Coalition, and collaborating closely with other devolved Governments to progress action, including our world-leading climate justice fund.

As Maurice Golden rightly said, some of our environment in Scotland remains degraded, which is a challenge for us all. When we listen to young people, they can often identify solutions to that and other questions. That includes through Scotland’s Climate Assembly, where contributions through the Children’s Parliament fed into recommendations to ministers, including on legislation to restrict the use of single-use plastic. We continue to engage young people in our just transition plans and the path to net zero. By prioritising climate action, we will safeguard the future for Scotland’s coming generations.

The Government remains dedicated to protecting, promoting and advancing human rights, and to developing ambitious legislation to incorporate more international treaties into Scots law. We have successfully incorporated the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, aligning our nation with UN standards. That develops our commitment to place children who are alive today as well as forthcoming generations of children at the heart of our decision making, as those with the greatest stake in our future.

As Ben Macpherson has emphasised, we are taking concrete steps to eradicate poverty in line with UN commitments, with child poverty being the Government’s top priority. We are progressing action to reach the ambitious targets of the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017, including assigning £3 billion a year to tackle poverty and the reality of the cost of living crisis.

The Scottish Government is happy to continue dialogue with Ms Boyack on her bill. We are staunch in our objective of developing sustainable public health services, including through programmes such as our centre for sustainable delivery and through bolstering preventative support.

As a Government, we will continue to take action to combat numerous inequalities, both in Scotland and in our international development partner countries, to leave a fairer world for future generations. That includes our equally safe delivery plan, which progresses action on the UN priority of eradicating all forms of discrimination and violence against women and girls.

Mr Whitfield highlighted the importance of intergenerational planning as opposed to short-termism and, again, I think that there is consensus in the chamber on that. I have to point out, though, that we face challenges in that respect when the Parliament does not know from year to year what income it has to work with or what it will be allocated. However, we will act, and we do need to meet the challenges of the future.

Mark Ruskell said some wise and challenging words about the difficulties at the heart, perhaps, of democracy, or the difficulty of thinking of the long term in the heat of an electoral cycle or the heat of political events. We need to think about that, and we need to build genuine political consensus on these issues.

In conclusion, the draft declaration challenges this and other Governments to act as a global team player and to strengthen the foundations for lasting action on sustainable development, thereby safeguarding the interests of future generations. As emphasised by the First Minister in the programme for government, we are committed to working across party lines, not least via the declaration, to improve the lives of the people of Scotland and well beyond.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions, and the portfolio on this occasion is net zero and energy, and transport.

I invite members who wish to ask a supplementary question to press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question and I ask them to cut out any lengthy preambles and limit themselves to a single question. I make a plea for responses to be similarly brief.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

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

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it has taken to implement Scotland’s national transport strategy. (S6O-03669)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The national transport strategy was developed collaboratively with partners and underpins all decision making that is related to transport, with regional transport partnerships developing strategies for their area to align with it. Delivering its vision is a shared endeavour, with responsibilities across the Scottish Government, operators, local authorities, business, industry and users. I co-chair the national transport strategy delivery board alongside the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, and it includes members from partner organisations.

Last December, we published a report to Parliament outlining the steps that we have taken to deliver the strategy, alongside our third delivery plan for 2023-24. The fourth plan will be published later this year.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

The Scottish Government’s national transport strategy is based on four priorities: reducing inequality; taking action on climate change; delivering economic growth; and improving health and wellbeing. Scrapping peak fares on ScotRail has driven a shift from road to rail. Four million extra train journeys have been made—two million of them because people have been incentivised to leave their cars at home. Does not the cabinet secretary understand why people are angry about her announcement that the Government will force up some rail fares by 48 per cent? Does she not accept that that decision fails on every single one of her Government’s four national transport strategy tests? Will she do the right thing while there is still time and reverse this disastrous decision?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

There are a number of portfolio questions on this topic. I will address the member’s questions directly. He is quite correct to identify that the Scottish Government’s national missions include tackling child poverty and tackling the climate emergency.

On the measure of modal shift, the peak fares trial failed, unfortunately. The amount of car journeys that transferred to rail was 0.1 per cent. In addition, the discount that has existed over the past year has seen many existing rail users benefit by hundreds if not thousands of pounds, but the assessment, which I encourage him to read, shows that the majority of those who benefited were on middle to high incomes. On those two measures alone, the report shows that his analysis is incorrect.

With the discounts that are being provided, a flexipass between Falkirk and Edinburgh will cost £13.40 per return journey for five returns, compared with the current off-peak fare of £12.10. With an annual season ticket, travelling four days a week, the fare will be £10.04. That is a reduction. If the member listens to what I have said and is prepared to promote the discounts that are being announced now for the coming year and beyond, he will see that some people will be paying a similar amount to what they have been paying during the peak fare removal trial. He will see that if he looks at the figures.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That is not an auspicious start on the back of my request for brevity. Bill Kidd, let us see whether we can do any better.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

More than 150 million free bus journeys have been made by children and young people in Scotland since the introduction of free bus travel for under-22s. Will the cabinet secretary set out how that Scottish Government initiative is working towards the vision and priorities of the national transport strategy?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

One year on, the evaluation of the scheme has shown that, by making bus travel more accessible, it is already opening doors to new opportunities and reducing travel costs for families across Scotland. By making sustainable travel easier and cheaper for Scotland’s children and young people, that transformational policy is giving them the very best chance to succeed in life, as well as supporting them to play their part in cutting emissions and taking climate action in line with the vision of the national transport strategy.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The reintroduction of peak fares on the railways will mean huge fare increases across the country. If I want to get a return from East Kilbride to Glasgow, it will cost me 55 per cent more, and a return journey from East Kilbride to Edinburgh will cost me 84 per cent more. How does that fit in with the Scottish Government’s ambition to cut car journeys by a fifth by next year?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The member’s latter point is an incorrect assessment of what the plans are in relation to the reduction of car journeys.

In relation to the member’s travel, as he is a regular commuter by train, he can use a flexipass, which will have a permanent 20 per cent reduction, or he can use an annual season ticket, which will have a 20 per cent reduction.

The figures that I have set out in relation to the discounts that are being introduced just now show that people will be able to have reduced fares that are, in many cases, similar to the off-peak fares. I will be delighted to send the member the East Kilbride figures so that he can promote the discounts that will be available for regular commuters, as he is, to his constituents in the wider central region.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide further details of its position on the reintroduction of peak fares on ScotRail trains. (S6O-03670)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

All MSPs and the public can read the report evaluating the peak fares removal trial on Transport Scotland’s website and I would encourage them to do so. Although there was a limited increase in the number of passengers during the year, the scheme did not achieve one of the key aims of encouraging a significant modal shift from car to rail. It mainly benefited those people who already used rail, saving them hundreds if not thousands of pounds through subsidised discounted fares and, although some lower-income passengers benefited, it was mostly middle to higher-income passengers who did.

Given the financial challenges that we face and the significant additional subsidy that is required to continue the pilot versus its limited contribution towards the Government’s missions of tackling climate change and child poverty, the pilot will end on 27 September. To mitigate the impact, we are reducing the cost of season tickets and flexipasses by 20 per cent, and I encourage all members to promote that.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

The cabinet secretary clearly does not understand the economic argument that the cost for someone who lives in Edinburgh to go to Glasgow will go from £16.20 to £31.40, which will simply force more people into their cars. Was a proper economic and environmental study carried out? If so, will it be debated in Parliament before the final decision is made?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The decision has been made. It was always a trial. In fact, we extended that trial not just once but twice. I was keen to see it succeed, which is why it was extended until September.

I will give an example of the promotions that I have already outlined in Parliament. A Glasgow to Edinburgh return is currently £16.20 all day; with the offer that has just been announced for 20 per cent savings on season tickets, a return will cost the equivalent of £14.82 per day for an annual season ticket holder if they are travelling five days a week. For those people who use a flexipass, that same return journey from Edinburgh to Glasgow will cost £21.25. Those discounts, from September, will offset the current situation between peak and off-peak fares. A £16.20 off-peak fare is very attractive compared with the figures that have been cited today.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I will try to take a further couple of supplementaries, but they will need to be brief, as will the responses.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

My constituents are interested in the actual costs of their commute. Will the cabinet secretary set out what savings are available to the average commuter from Paisley using popular routes?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The specific savings that are available will be individual to the commuter and the route that they commute on. With the 20 per cent discount on season passes, for those commuting to work more frequently, it means that the equivalent fare per journey is, in some cases, lower than the off-peak fare and, in all cases, cheaper than paying for day-return tickets at any time.

Alternatively, flexipasses offer savings for those who do not commute regularly or frequently. Flexipasses consist of 10 tickets over a two-month period. For passengers on the Paisley Gilmour Street to Glasgow route, who currently enjoy a £4.90 all-day fare, if they travelled five days a week on an annual season ticket, it would be the equivalent of £3.25 per day. For those who travel less regularly and would prefer a flexipass, a daily fare would be £4.85, compared with the peak fare of £7.20.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I hope that the cabinet secretary will reflect on the deep disappointment of thousands and thousands of people across Scotland at the return of peak fares. Scrapping peak fares led to an increase in passengers—around 7 per cent—and more income for ScotRail. If bringing back peak fares results in passengers abandoning train travel, that will mean less income for ScotRail. If that happens, will the cabinet secretary consider reversing the position?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have already said that I was personally disappointed that a successful evaluation was not reported. The 6.8 per cent increase in use was at the maximum level. At the lower level, the assessment was less than 3 per cent. Unfortunately, the increase in journeys was at the beginning of the pilot; latterly, it tailed off. The assessment was made around the beginning of July, so it does not include the disruptive period. However, I have also said that, should the United Kingdom Government start to invest more in public services—and we get consequentials—I am open to reconsidering the position.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will review its goal of decarbonising transport, in light of its reported decision to increase fares and reduce services on Scotland’s railways. (S6O-03671)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We continue to decarbonise our transport with additional funding to support Scotland’s electric vehicle charging network, and to support confident switching to electric cars. We are on target to provide 6,000 EV chargers by 2026.

On rail, we recently electrified the Barrhead line, and we are electrifying the East Kilbride line, with the provision of a travel interchange. Only yesterday, I announced approval for the procurement of a replacement train fleet for our intercity services. We have just announced funding of £41.7 million for 252 low-emission buses.

Unfortunately, the peak fare removal trial was unsuccessful: just 0.1 per cent of car journeys moved to rail. I am hopeful that the current temporary timetable will return to a full timetable shortly, and I am pleased that rail unions are recommending to their members that they accept the latest pay offer from ScotRail.

As the member has heard, I have taken steps to introduce discounts of 20 per cent on annual season tickets, and permanent discounts of 20 per cent on flexipasses.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Transport is now Scotland’s biggest emitter of CO 2 , yet rail passengers face a double whammy of fare hikes and cuts to more than 530 train services a day, compared with 2019. The United Kingdom Climate Change Committee has accused the Scottish Government of having no plan to reduce car kilometres, and the Government undermined the peak service trial with cuts to services and a lack of advertising. Does the cabinet secretary accept that the Government has dismantled travellers’ ability to make greener transport choices, is driving up costs on the railways and driving down services, and has, seemingly, abandoned its own goal of decarbonising our transport system?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I completely reject that analysis. I have talked about the increase in electric chargers. We have the most comprehensive electric charging system outside London, which is encouraging people to switch to electric vehicles. I also point out that, if we want to tackle car use, investing in buses would probably be our preference. We have limited choices. Do we invest in rail, where, as we know from the evaluation, the impact is more on middle to upper-income passengers and does not encourage more people to switch from car? Investment in other modes might be a better use of public funding. I am still committed to trying to make rail more attractive to more people. However, 75 per cent of passenger journeys on rail are already on electrified lines. We are improving what we are doing to support the bus fleet. That is a strong argument on decarbonisation. I am very pleased about that. I recently met the Climate Change Committee and discussed our proposals. The committee knows that we are proposing to bring forward a 20 per cent car reduction—

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Thank you, cabinet secretary. We will need to have briefer responses.

We have a brief supplementary question from Beatrice Wishart.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

It is not just railways that need decarbonising. Ageing ferries are Shetland’s biggest carbon emitters and many need to be replaced. Will the Scottish Government outline its policy on short subsea tunnels for Shetland, as such a project would be a contributor to the Scottish Government’s goal of decarbonising transport?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Beatrice Wishart will know that it is the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government who is working with the Shetland ferry replacement task force. I am open to work on both ferries and tunnels. The big infrastructure spend that would be required on tunnels needs innovation—and it needs independence. Having the capability as a state to do big infrastructure projects such as subsea tunnels—the Faroe Islands rely on the Danish state to underwrite their tunnels—is a positive argument for changing how we fund our public services.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Will the cabinet secretary offer examples of achievements in the decarbonisation of Scotland’s railway under the Scottish National Party and give an indication of what impact the new intercity fleet is anticipated to have in that regard?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The new intercity fleet has a requirement to reduce emissions. As Evelyn Tweed will know from her constituency, the Stirling-Dunblane-Alloa line has been electrified. We know about the Edinburgh to Glasgow line. As I have already indicated, the electrification of the Glasgow to Barrhead line was completed recently, and we are working on the East Kilbride line.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with Network Rail and ScotRail with regards to improving the Dumfries-Glasgow train service. (S6O-03672)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Transport Scotland officials regularly meet ScotRail and Network Rail Scotland to discuss rail services. Train services in Dumfries and Galloway have been improved through ScotRail’s previous timetable changes, which resulted in a consistent hourly service between Dumfries and Carlisle and a two-hourly service between Dumfries and Glasgow. Like many other routes, the Dumfries to Glasgow service has been affected by the current ScotRail temporary reduced timetable. I am hopeful that there will be a return of normal services, and I am keen for that to happen as soon as possible.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The Dumfries to Glasgow rail service is a vital link that connects communities in the south to Scotland’s cities. Constituents report that the service is slow and that the fleet servicing the line is dated. We have heard that, if the journey time is faster, such as by electrification, Dumfries and other areas of Dumfries and Galloway could become commuter towns for Glasgow, helping to address depopulation. Will the cabinet secretary agree to meet me to discuss how we can improve that important line?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government is committed to decarbonising its passenger rail network. That is set out in our decarbonisation plan, which is a dynamic document that is due for a refresh. That is under way, and we will examine how decarbonisation can best be achieved. The plan commits to all passenger diesel trains being replaced. The order in which and programme by which that is done will depend on business cases and available budgets.

Although there is no timeline for the electrification of the line from Glasgow to Dumfries, and it is yet to be confirmed, I am happy to meet Emma Harper to discuss that important matter in more detail.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

It is not surprising that Emma Harper did not mention the 80 per cent fare hike for a ticket from Dumfries to Glasgow, which will rise from £24 to £43.

The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers has highlighted the flawed trial evaluation process, with the first survey being carried out in December, when there are fewer commuters, and the second survey being carried out in July, when many commuters in Scotland are on holiday. How can the cabinet secretary justify the decision to scrap the trial, which will result in exorbitant fare increases for hard-pressed rural commuters?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I will send Finlay Carson more detail on the season ticket reduction for Carlisle to Dumfries, but I can briefly tell him that someone will pay £8.91 for a return journey if they use a season ticket five days a week. Using a flexipass and discount, they will pay £15.95.

On the evaluation process, I note that December is a busy time for the trains. We had not wanted to do the second evaluation survey during the July period. However, because of the Conservative Government calling the election, we were—[ Interruption .]. No, genuinely, because it was a popular policy, we were asked not to do the research during the earlier June period and we had to postpone it to July. That is a matter of fact, whether Finlay Carson likes it or not. I did not like it and he does not like it, but it is a matter of fact.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

Can the cabinet secretary explain why commuters who use the Dumfries to Glasgow Nith valley line face the largest hike in rail fares when peak fares are reintroduced? A peak-time return from Dumfries to Carlisle will increase from £7.60 to £23.50. That is a 211 per cent increase. Nowhere else in Scotland do people face such big differences between peak and off-peak fares as will be experienced by those who travel from Dumfries station. Why are people in my area being discriminated against as a result of the utterly illogical way in which ScotRail fares are set?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am happy to ask ScotRail to provide an explanation directly to Colin Smyth. However, he makes a very important point about anomalies between fares and fare miles. One of the things that we did in taking rail into public ownership was to require ScotRail and Scottish Rail Holdings to provide a system that delivers a fairer system of fares. I am due to receive a report on that next year. That does not address the point that Colin Smyth makes as of now, but I will specifically take it up with ScotRail.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We are 20 minutes in and we are only halfway through the questions, so the questions will have to be briefer, as will the responses.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to assist local authorities with repairing potholes, in light of reports of the detrimental impact that large numbers of potholes are having on drivers across Scotland. (S6O-03673)

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

I very much appreciate the road maintenance challenges and the importance of a safe, well-performing road network. I certainly do not minimise the importance of the point that the member has raised.

However, local road maintenance is the responsibility of local authorities, which allocate resources based on their local priorities. The 2024-25 local government settlement increased local authorities’ share of the budget and delivered record funding of more than £14 billion, which represents a real-terms increase of 2.5 per cent. The independent Accounts Commission confirmed that that followed real-terms increases in 2022-23 and 2023-24.

It is for locally elected representatives to decide how best to deliver services to their communities. The Scottish Government has increased the maintenance budget for the trunk road network, for which it is responsible.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

The number of potholes recorded by local authorities is on the rise, with 2,463 having been recorded in East Dunbartonshire alone. Years of brutal funding cuts mean that our local authorities lack the resources to afford essential road repairs, and we know that the Scottish Government is set to make damaging cuts to the budget. How does the Scottish Government intend to address the many worries of drivers, who pay high prices for the damage that is caused by potholes and fear that the issue might never be fixed?

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

For the sake of brevity, I will repeat the point that I just made. Such decisions are for local authorities. The Government has increased the amount of money that is provided to local authorities, and local authorities will prioritise their spend.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve road safety on the A75. (S6O-03674)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government is committed to improving safety on our trunk roads, including the A75. Since 2007, more than £152 million has been invested in the A75 to ensure its safe and efficient operation.

We are progressing a number of actions to further improve safety on the A75, including the introduction of a speed management scheme on the A75 at Crocketford, the introduction of signalisation at Cuckoo Bridge roundabout and junction improvements on the A75 at Haugh of Urr. Our annual assessment of trunk road safety performance has identified sections of the A75 by Mouswald, Glenluce and Twynholm for further investigation this financial year.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer and for mentioning Mouswald. I would like the whole road to be dualled, but it is clear that that is not going to happen under the Scottish National Party. Therefore, will be cabinet secretary take away and consider the very reasonable request from some deeply concerned and desperate constituents at Mouswald for a couple of double white lines to be introduced, to prevent dangerous overtaking and potentially save lives at that location?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I will undertake to look at that. I can tell Oliver Mundell that Transport Scotland has incorporated the Mouswald junction into the investigation on the A75 from just west of Breconrae to east of Craigie Bank, which is scheduled to be undertaken in 2025-26.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

To ask the Scottish Government what its priorities are for COP29, which will take place in Baku later this year. (S6O-03675)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Scotland is committed to playing our part at COPs, working with international partners to secure a global transition to a net zero and resilient future in a way that is fair and just for all.

Although our plans for COP29 are still being developed, we anticipate that they will focus on driving international action on equitable and transparent climate finance; using our leadership of Regions4 and the Under2 Coalition to build climate ambition and action; showcasing our net zero journey; and playing our part, as good global citizens, to advance international relations.

As is usual at COPs, in ensuring that the voices of women, young people and the global south are heard at COP29, Scotland will continue to play a bridging role across all those aims.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Pollok)

Scotland can rightly pride itself on being a pioneer of the loss and damage fund, as it became the first country in the global north to commit funds for loss and damage at COP26. By doing so, Scotland recognised that those in the global south are disproportionately impacted by the climate crisis.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that, if the fight against climate injustice is to be meaningfully continued, not only must the loss and damage funds that were committed to at COP28 last year be distributed as quickly as possible to communities ravaged by the climate crisis, but that must be done in a way that does not further increase the debt burden for countries in the global south?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I absolutely agree. The Scottish Government’s climate justice approach recognises our moral responsibility to support vulnerable communities in the global south to address climate-induced loss and damage. The communities that are least responsible for the global climate crisis are often most severely affected by it.

Scotland welcomed the agreement at COP28 on operationalising the loss and damage fund of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. I recognise the fundamental role that Humza Yousaf played in that and the leadership that he has shown on loss and damage. The fund must be urgently mobilised to ensure rapid and equitable access to sufficient funding. It is crucial that a portion of the fund is ring-fenced to provide finance directly to communities in the form of grants, not loans. The urgency of the climate crisis and its disproportional impact demand that we act now.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I will take a couple of brief supplementary questions.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

Given the sustained failure by the Scottish Government to meet our climate targets, would demonstrating how we could reduce our homes, buildings, transport and land emissions not be a fundamental contribution for us to make if we are to have credibility at COP29?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Sarah Boyack will hear no disagreement from me, except on her first point. We are demonstrating our credibility. The programme for government, which was announced yesterday, set out some of the actions are being taken not only in my portfolio but across many portfolios, including that of the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, who is sitting beside me, and in land use. A climate change bill will be brought to Parliament and a heat in buildings bill is also part of the programme for government.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Does the cabinet secretary think that the Scottish National Party Government can go to COP29 with a single ounce of credibility now that it has ditched its climate change targets and has this week diverted £460 million of ScotWind cash away from the climate emergency and towards filling the black hole in the SNP budget?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Mr Lumsden will not be surprised to hear that I do not agree in the slightest. We have already halved our emissions and have plans to do an awful lot more. We are bringing forward a new climate change bill that will mean we will have a credible plan towards 2045, as we always have done. This is a high priority for the First Minister and his Government. It is threaded through not only my portfolio but every single portfolio in Government and the action that must be taken will be taken across the board.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the dualling of the A9. (S6O-03676)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government is progressing with the A9 dualling delivery plan that was set out to Parliament in December 2023. Work will begin on the Tomatin to Moy section in the coming months, following contract award in July. That will be the start of continuous work on A9 dualling until the programme is completed. I announced the three shortlisted bidders for the next section, from the Tay crossing to Ballinluig, in August. Once those two sections are completed by the end of in 2028, 45 per cent of the A9 between Perth and Inverness will be dualled.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The Scottish National Party’s failure to dual the A9 is a complete betrayal of the people of Scotland. Between January 2020 and December 2023, non-dualled sections of the A9 accounted for 90 per cent of fatal accidents. That travesty comes solely at the hands of the SNP. Does the cabinet secretary accept that? What guarantees are being given that the dualling of the A9 will be completed by 2035 at the latest?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I can give that commitment, because it is set out in the plan that we reported to Parliament last December. I am conscious of the issue of fatalities. There have been different numbers of fatalities in different years.

It is really important to recognise that the work that we are doing means that contracts are already being let and that work is commencing. As I said, there will be continuous work on the A9 until it is completed in 2035, with 45 per cent of that to be done by 2028.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I call Fergus Ewing to ask a brief supplementary question.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

[ Inaudible .]—bringing forward the completion date for dualling of the A9, which is presently 2035. I ask the cabinet secretary what progress is being made on that plea and consideration thereof. Secondly, will she make an oral statement in Parliament to provide a full update about such progress for a swifter completion?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am afraid that I missed the beginning of the member’s contribution. However, he and others met me and the First Minister to discuss the A9 dualling and I undertake, as the First Minister did, to keep the programme under review to identify whether there is any way to make any progress in terms of speed. The other issue that the member raised at that meeting was the ordering. We have to balance market capacity, impacts on road users and the challenging financial constraints, but the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee will receive regular updates on the A9, as we have promised. Looking at acceleration would require careful consideration and it will not be immediate but, in keeping that under review, I undertake to keep the member and, indeed, Parliament informed of any progress.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I apologise to those whom I was unable to call. As members will see, we have overrun quite a bit and we need to move on to the next item of business. There will be a brief pause to allow members on the front benches to change positions.

Programme for Government 2024-25 (Eradicating Child Poverty)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-14322, in the name of Jenny Gilruth, on the programme for government—eradicating child poverty. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak button.

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

Ending child poverty is the single greatest priority for this Government and is, I hope, a truly national mission that is supported across the chamber. I am pleased to be opening this debate as education secretary in what I hope is a demonstration of the cross-Government approach that we are taking to that mission. Ending child poverty is a job not just for me, the social justice secretary, the health secretary or any one of my colleagues; it is a mission for all of us in Government at all levels.

We undoubtedly approach that mission in what are clearly challenging circumstances. The Scottish Government’s budget is under the most severe and sustained pressure since this Parliament was reconvened in 1999. However, it is worth reminding Parliament that it is in that challenging context that we are already taking considerable action to alleviate child poverty within our current devolved powers.

We are investing around £3 billion per year in our mission to eradicate child poverty, address the cost of living crisis and break the cycle of poverty, and we know that that action is making a difference. Modelling that was published in February estimates that 100,000 children will be kept out of relative poverty this year by Scottish Government policies such as the Scottish child payment, with relative child poverty levels estimated to be 10 percentage points lower than they would otherwise have been. As Professor Morag Treanor from the University of Glasgow has observed, the Scottish child payment has been a game changer for Scotland. She noted that

“Levels of child poverty in Scotland will drop faster”

and

“further than they will in the rest of the UK, particularly England, because of this payment”.

However, there is much more that we need to do in order to fully eradicate child poverty.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The First Minister made quite a deal yesterday about the interconnected, whole-family approach that is required in order to help families, but there was no reference in the programme for government or in his speech to the whole family wellbeing fund, which was to be £500 million up until 2026. It has caused some concern that there is no specific reference to that. Can the cabinet secretary put our minds at rest and commit to that £500 million by 2026?

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

Mr Rennie might know that I am recused from issues to do with The Promise as my wife sits on the oversight board. However, I am sure that Shirley-Anne Somerville will respond to that specific point when she sums up the debate.

I mentioned that this year’s programme for government reinforces our commitment to work in partnership with local government and stakeholders across whole-family support, which Mr Rennie mentioned, employability, childcare, education, and housing. That is because the Government alone will not eradicate child poverty; it will take all of us, across Scotland, working together, united in focus and purpose, to deliver the change that is required.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

The cabinet secretary talks about family provision. One of the family provisions that allow disabled people to go out is the provision of changing places toilets. However, the Scottish Government announced on Tuesday that the £10 million fund for new changing places toilets had been removed. How does that help families, particularly those in poverty, to go out and access services in our cities and towns?

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

Mr Balfour raises an extremely valid point, and I recognise the challenge in this instance. He will also recognise the real challenges that the Scottish Government faces at the current time, which are largely driven by decisions taken elsewhere that have driven inflation to such levels that we have had to, for example, settle record levels of local government pay deals. I think that that was the right thing to do, but it means that there is less finance for other projects, such as the one that Mr Balfour mentions. I also recognise the importance of that fund in my constituency and in other places in Scotland. As with all the funding that we are considering in the Government, if additional funding becomes available, we will prioritise it to support the families who are most in need.

I want to talk about some of the support and investment that we are already providing in Scotland—investment that does not necessarily exist in other parts of the United Kingdom at the current time. For example, we have established an emergency fund to support councils in removing the impact of school meal debt on families and, building on our existing partnerships in Glasgow, Clackmannanshire and Dundee, we are investing in five more place-based partnerships. We are also investing in local projects to tackle child poverty through a second round of our child poverty practice accelerator fund.

We know that breaking the cycle of poverty means supporting the next generation to thrive and helping parents to get on in fair work. Of course, Scotland is the only part of the UK to already offer 1,140 hours of early learning and childcare to all three and four-year-olds and to eligible two-year-olds, regardless of their parents’ working status. That provision of extra ELC is helping to save families, on average, £5,500 per child per year, which is what they would have to pay if they paid for that care themselves.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

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

I would like to make some progress.

We know that that approach is making a substantial difference already, by saving families money and, importantly, allowing women to return to the workplace. In 2024-25, we will continue to invest around £1 billion in high-quality ELC, and we will continue to expand access to funded childcare for families who need it most through our work in the six early adopter communities. In those early adopter communities, since 2022, we have been working with families who are most at risk of living in poverty to provide them with the school-age child services that they need, and families tell us that that funding is making a difference. It is helping to get them back into work and to alleviate pressure on household budgets.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

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

I will, but I am mindful of time, Presiding Officer.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that a survey that was conducted by Pregnant Then Screwed found that a quarter of mothers on maternity leave who are eligible for the new Government-funded childcare scheme have been told that they cannot apply for the free hours, even though they are eligible for them, and that, as a result, they will have to return to work early. How does the cabinet secretary respond to that?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I can give you the time back for the intervention, cabinet secretary.

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

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I am happy to work with the member and, of course, with Natalie Don-Innes, the Minister for Children, Young People and the Promise, to resolve the matter that she has raised. However, it is important to note that the provision of 1,140 hours in Scotland is quite a different level from what is available in other parts of the UK and that, further, as a result of the approach of the Conservatives, the provision in other parts of the UK is linked to having parents in work. We do not discriminate on that basis in Scotland—we have a much more equitable offer. As I said, I am happy to work with the member to support that work further.

I mentioned that we are delivering childcare, and I want to talk about wraparound school-age childcare, which is hugely important for parents and which we are providing to support around 600 children from 500 families through the early adopter projects that I mentioned. The programme for government also highlights an example of the difference that that project in Dundee is making to one mum who has been able to get back into work with the right support and funded childcare—that wraparound approach that we know works and helps to support parents into sustained positive destinations.

It is imperative that we continue to drive an increase in the take-up of funded early learning and childcare for eligible two-year-olds. Our local authorities take that very seriously, and we will continue to work with them to focus on boosting take-up among families who are most at risk of poverty.

Over 2024-25, we will continue to support the extra time programme, investing £4 million in a partnership with the Scottish Football Association to deliver before-school, after-school and breakfast clubs through 31 football clubs spread all over the country. That funding is providing 3,000 targeted free places each week for children, who are benefiting from access to food, activities and support while their parents are more easily able to work.

I turn now to school and post-16 education. By investing in children and young people’s education to enable them to begin work or further or higher education when they leave school, we can help to break the poverty-related cycle. Through our continued investment in the Scottish attainment challenge, the poverty-related gap for young people leaving school and going on to a positive destination has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009. Further, there have been record levels of attainment in literacy and numeracy in our primary 7 pupils over the past year. As this year’s exam results show, there has been a 25 per cent increase this year alone in the number of technical and vocational qualifications achieved. That is a true mark of progress, as more young people are able to choose non-traditional routes in their qualifications to exhibit their success.

There has also been extraordinary success with the widening access agenda, in partnership with our universities, with record numbers of students from our poorest communities going on to university, supported by free university tuition. Indeed, the most recent data from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, from August, showed a 12 per cent increase this year in acceptances from the 20 per cent most deprived areas of Scotland. That is a record that we, our universities and, most importantly, our students can be proud of.

Our support to young people is not just academic. We understand that families need our support at this time, and we are taking strong action to reduce the cost of the school day for families. That is why we have extended free school meals, saving families £400 per year for every eligible child taking those meals. As was confirmed yesterday, we will focus the next stage in our efforts on free school meal expansion for those children who need it most. That is why, even in the extremely tough, financially circumstances that we face as a result of austerity from the United Kingdom Government, we are investing to deliver free school meal expansion for primary 6 and 7 pupils in receipt of the Scottish child payment. That is real action in our mission to eradicate child poverty, which I hope everyone in the Parliament can support.

Very shortly in the coming weeks, we will publish school clothing and uniform guidance, which will focus on measures to support schools to design and implement affordable policies that recognise the individual needs and identity of our pupils. We will continue to provide funding to all local authorities for the removal of core curriculum charges for all primary and secondary pupils, which is worth £8 million in this financial year alone.

We are investing £1 billion during this parliamentary session through the Scottish attainment challenge, helping schools to fund, for example, income maximisation officers at Braes high school in Falkirk, supporting families to access the benefits that they are entitled to. That investment is also supporting Fair Isle primary school in Fife, which is using some of its pupil equity funding for a family worker to support parents in boosting their household budgets. Elgin high school in Moray is further tackling the cost of the school day by introducing a food-to-go scheme.

Throughout this speech, I have referred to the need for joint working if we are to succeed in our mission to end child poverty: joint working within Government, joint working with councils, joint working with the third sector and working directly with our communities. I now need to touch on the joint working that would be most immediately impactful: genuine joint working with the UK Government. As the Parliament knows, the UK Government has powers at its fingertips right now that could alleviate child poverty. At the stroke of a pen, it could lift hundreds of thousands of children in Scotland out of poverty by taking the obvious step of lifting the two-child cap.

I am again asking the Parliament to come together and call on the UK Government to do exactly that. I am speaking in particular to colleagues on the Labour benches today, because I do not believe that there is a single person on those benches who truly believes that the two-child limit is the right policy. As members of the Parliament, each of us sees the impact of that policy in our constituencies every day. Today we have the opportunity to speak with one voice, and the people who sent us here will expect us to take it. The two-child limit must go, and it must go now.

There are other costs that the Scottish Government incurs, primarily those associated with mitigation. Indeed, it is worth reminding the Parliament that the Government is spending more than £1 billion mitigating the impacts of 14 years of UK Government policy, such as the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. That is action that we are proud to take to protect our people and to protect families in Scotland, but we should not have to take it. The purpose of this Parliament is not to ameliorate bad decision making from Westminster; the purpose of this Parliament should be to govern in the best interests of the people of Scotland. However, we are spending millions of pounds this year alone to mitigate UK Government welfare cuts, including the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. That is money that could and should have been spent on our schools or further ambitious anti-poverty measures.

Rather than those policies being mitigated in Scotland, the new UK Labour Government has the chance to end them at source. Indeed, Labour has some tough decisions fast approaching, because the great responsibility of Government comes with great accountability. I warn Labour colleagues that, if they are not careful, the Tory bedroom tax will become the Labour bedroom tax, the two-child cap will become Labour’s two-child cap and the child poverty to which those reprehensible policies lead will become Labour’s child poverty. There is an opportunity for the new UK Government to change course. It will find a willing partner in the Scottish Government, but emulating Tory austerity will not help Scotland’s children. Things have to get better.

Eradicating child poverty is the golden thread that runs through this year’s programme for government. It is a priority for all our portfolios. Although we have made good progress, we know that there is more to do and we remain resolutely committed to delivering the change that is needed. We will leave no stone unturned across Government as we seek to lift every child out of poverty. I ask each member of every party in the Parliament to work with us on that national mission.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the actions set out in the Programme for Government 2024-25 that focus on eradicating child poverty as the single greatest priority for the Scottish Government; recognises that sustained and cohesive effort is needed across all levels of government and in all parts of society to deliver on this national mission, especially at a time when the public finances are under acute pressure after 14 years of austerity; welcomes continued investment of around £3 billion in 2024-25 to eradicate poverty, mitigate the impacts of the cost of living crisis and invest in prevention to break the cycle of poverty; notes analysis of the Child Poverty Action Group, which estimates that low-income families in Scotland will be around £28,000 better off by the time that their child turns 18 when compared to other families across the UK; further notes modelling that estimates that 100,000 children will be kept out of relative poverty this year as a result of Scottish Government policies such as the Scottish Child Payment; recognises the Scottish Government’s commitment to working constructively with the UK Government to end child poverty once and for all, and agrees that the UK Government has the opportunity to lift thousands of children out of poverty in Scotland by taking action in the Autumn Budget to remove the two-child limit.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Thank you, cabinet secretary.

I advise members that we have a little time in hand, so I encourage members who have not yet pressed their request-to-speak button but want to speak in the debate to do so now. I also encourage members who wish to make an intervention to press their intervention button, not least because it is helpful for those who join us online.