Scottish Parliament, 21 November 2024

326 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that City of Edinburgh Council plans to move up to 700 residents living in unlicensed temporary accommodation this winter without suitable alternative accommodation being available. (S6O-03997)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Everyone has the right to a safe and suitable home. The Minister for Housing and I have twice met the leader and housing convener of the City of Edinburgh Council and we have pledged to work with the council on its plans to resolve the problem. Scottish Government officials are meeting daily with council officers and all options are urgently being explored to ensure that the affected residents are fully supported and, where necessary, safely rehoused.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The situation in Edinburgh shows the overwhelming need for an urgent, human rights-based response to the housing emergency by ministers and local authorities. There must be no dilution of the existing legal protections for people experiencing homelessness. Will the cabinet secretary work with the local authority, local stakeholders and any public bodies that may have suitable accommodation to find a pragmatic solution to ensure that no one ends up on the streets after 30 November?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Minister for Housing and I were pleased to meet yesterday with Lorna Slater and representatives of charities working in Edinburgh to outline the urgent steps that we are taking, alongside the council, to find a solution. I said at that meeting, and am happy to confirm again today, that we are looking at all the options that the Scottish Government could undertake, and that we will do so in conjunction with stakeholders so that we can be assured that we are aware of the consequences of any proposed change and can base any proposed solutions on data and evidence. I make that commitment again today to Lorna Slater and to those who were at the meeting that we both attended yesterday.

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

I thank the cabinet secretary for her answers so far and for the collaborative approach that is being taken with the City of Edinburgh Council to address a worrying situation. The situation is partly a product of the housing emergency, which is most acute in the capital. Will the cabinet secretary set out what additional and specific support the Scottish Government is providing to the City of Edinburgh Council, and will she say what share of the £40 million housing acquisition fund is being allocated to Edinburgh?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The £40 million housing acquisition fund has, in the main, been targeted at the local authorities facing the greatest pressures. That means that Edinburgh will receive just over £14 million of that £40 million allocation, which it can use both for acquisitions and to bring void properties back into use. The issue of void properties is usually dealt with solely by councils, but the Government has stepped in to give further flexibility. That takes the total amount available for investment in affordable housing in Edinburgh to more than £49 million this year.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to reduce waiting times for dental extractions in rural national health service board areas. (S6O-03998)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Any long wait for surgery is highly regrettable. However, it is important to note that the overwhelming majority of NHS dental care is delivered in a primary care setting.

We are working with health boards to develop detailed annual delivery plans to support waiting list reductions and improve productivity. We continue to target resources to ensure that those who have been waiting longest are treated as soon as possible.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

The results of a freedom of information request made to NHS health boards reveal a failure to deliver adequate dental care across Scotland. In NHS Dumfries and Galloway, children wait an average of 42 weeks, those in NHS Ayrshire and Arran wait for 20 weeks, and NHS Lothian has seen waiting times rise by almost 300 per cent since 2019.

The NHS is an emanation of the state, and article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is clear that every child has a right to the

“highest attainable standard of health”

and access to essential care. What is the Scottish Government’s defence of its failure to live up to that human right?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I recognise that the waiting lists for young children are far too long. I have visited the dental hospital in Glasgow to see what work it is doing to improve throughput and the work that it is doing with health boards. I also met the British Dental Association Scotland last week and listened to its concerns. As I noted in my first answer, we expect health boards to deliver annual delivery plans to clearly set out how they will address long waits across all specialties, including paediatric dentistry.

Willie Coffey (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how it can make communities safer from the use and impact of fireworks. (S6O-03999)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

We have introduced a number of measures to limit unsafe and antisocial use of fireworks, including restrictions on supply and powers for local authorities to designate firework control zones. Like the police and partners, we are keen to explore further opportunities to address and prevent disorder of the kind that we have seen in some places. I have written to the United Kingdom Government asking for a meeting to discuss what more can be done on fireworks regulation. We will continue to engage with the UK Government to gauge opportunities to improve fireworks regulation.

Willie Coffey (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley)

The minister will be acutely aware of the traumatic impact that the noise from fireworks can have on family pets and wildlife, with more examples each year of animals actually dying of fright from the noise, and we should not forget people who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Will the Government consider what more it can do to persuade people to opt for silent or low-noise fireworks? They are readily available and just as spectacular in visual displays, but they do not cause any traumatic effects for our household pets and wildlife or the citizens that I mentioned.

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I agree that fireworks should always be used responsibly, particularly considering the noise impact. I noted with interest that there is a private member’s bill in the House of Commons that seeks to mandate the use of silent or low-noise fireworks. The legal maximum noise level for fireworks is defined in the UK-wide legislation. As I said, I have written to the UK Government to request a meeting to discuss updating fireworks regulation. I recognise that we share the goal of enhancing community safety and wellbeing, and I plan to address the noise issues as part of those conversations.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with East Dunbartonshire Council regarding the condition of Milngavie primary school. (S6O-04000)

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

Scottish Government officials continue to be in close contact with East Dunbartonshire Council regarding the condition of Milngavie primary school. The council advised that it has had a number of site meetings at the school with the parent council, councillors and MSPs. It stated that those meetings were positive and helped the council to demonstrate the work that has been completed to date. Further remedial work is planned and the council has assured us that it will continue to engage with the parent council and school community as it progresses.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

Milngavie primary school is a Victorian-era building and it is in poor condition. East Dunbartonshire Council had a plan for a full and thorough refurbishment that should have begun by now, but that plan had to be put on hold as a knock-on effect of the previous United Kingdom Government’s decision to cut Scotland’s capital budget by 20 per cent. The urgent remedial work that has taken place has resolved some of the most acute issues, but a thorough refurbishment of the building is clearly required. That is the consensus of all political parties and elected representatives in East Dunbartonshire.

Is the cabinet secretary willing to visit the school with me? Given the slight relief to Scotland’s capital settlement as a result of the most recent UK budget announcement, will the Government consider providing an increase to the learning estate improvement programme to allow both Milngavie primary school and the other schools in East Dunbartonshire that require refurbishment or a full rebuild to proceed?

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

I thank Ross Greer for his interest in the matter. He has written to me directly and I am happy to confirm on the record that I will visit the school with him and ask officials to continue their engagement with East Dunbartonshire Council.

It is worth putting it on the record that the funding that was announced in the UK Government’s autumn statement was broadly in line with our planning assumptions. However, we will continue to look carefully at the context of education consequentials.

Ross Greer will know that the reason why the new UK Government has been forced to prioritise investment in school buildings is a legacy of the Conservative Government’s previous starving of investment in school buildings in England. That is not the case in Scotland, where we have prioritised investment in our school estate. That has been shown in the latest statistics, with more than 91 per cent of our buildings now in good or satisfactory condition.

East Dunbartonshire Council has benefited from £10.2 million for schools in its area through the previous schools for the future programme, and is benefiting through the learning estate investment programme. I am happy to continue to work with Ross Greer on the issue. I recognise the strength of local feeling. Officials will continue to engage with the local authority.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Worried parents, including the president of the parent council, have written to me expressing distress over the state of Milngavie primary school. I visited the school premises last month, and it was clear that more substantial work needs to be done. I have also received correspondence from parents at Westerton primary school in Bearsden, who said that that school building is in dire need of repair. What action is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that children’s safety in schools is a number 1 priority?

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

It is worth reminding Pam Gosal that the school estate does not belong to the Scottish Government. It is owned by local authorities. Responsibility for the school estate therefore rests with the local authority.

I very much hear the strength of feeling from Pam Gosal, which has also been reflected by Ross Greer. I hope that she has heard my continued commitment to engaging with the local authority on the issue.

The Government has provided significant additional investment to improve the quality of our school estate. Back in 2007, approximately 61 per cent of the estate was in good or satisfactory condition; today, the figure is more than 91 per cent. That has happened only as a direct result of investment from the Government. I hope that Pam Gosal recognises that, and I commit again to working directly with the local authority on helping to drive the improvements in the primary school that she named.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the number of people who are not aware of a do not resuscitate order being placed on their medical notes, including in relation to next of kin and power of attorney holders. (S6O-04001)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The Scottish Government does not centrally collect information or data relating to the number or use of do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation—DNACPR—forms. As with all other clinical treatments, decisions about CPR should be based on the individual clinical circumstances and wishes of the patient, and should be recorded appropriately. That is done in hard copy on a DNACPR form, the existence of which is then recorded on an individual’s key information summary. Such information is shared only for the purposes of direct care, and is therefore not centrally collected.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I acknowledge that the Scottish Government is not collecting that information.

Serious concerns have been raised, especially during the pandemic, about the use of do not resuscitate—also known as do not attempt resuscitation—orders. Is the Scottish Government looking at changing that process? What investigation have ministers undertaken to assess how many patients may still be unaware that a DNR order has been placed on their medical notes? Will the cabinet secretary review that, and review the collection of data by the Scottish Government?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank Miles Briggs for raising an issue that is, obviously, incredibly sensitive. I recognise the strength of feeling among patients and others whom he seeks to represent today.

In 2016, the DNACPR policy was reviewed to reflect feedback on changes in the United Kingdom-wide national good practice guidance from the British Medical Association, the Royal College of Nursing and the Resuscitation Council UK. A note of legal changes, which had resulted from case law, and specialist legal advice were provided as part of the formation of that policy. The Scottish Government continually reviews best practice and advice relating to resuscitation. We are undertaking work to improve our electronic recording systems, to allow us to provide more clarity on care planning at a local and national level.

In recognition of the sensitivity of the issue, if further discussion in a more private space would be helpful to Miles Briggs, I will be happy to facilitate that.

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

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what action it is taking to improve access to audiology services. (S6O-04002)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Audiology is considered to be a clinical priority area, and improvement work is now being progressed through the national planning and delivery board arrangements, led by the chief operating officer of NHS Scotland. I wrote to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee on 23 September to outline that work, and committed to writing to the committee again in January 2025 with a further update on progress.

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

The minister will know that it is cost effective to provide hearing-loss services for adults in the community, rather than in hospitals, and that primary care and high street audiologists are expert clinicians who can improve access to care in communities throughout Scotland and can timeously address hearing loss at the right time to reduce associated loneliness and isolation. Does the minister agree that we could benefit from approaching hearing loss in Scotland in the same way as we approach eye tests in the community—as set out in Specsavers’ recent “It’s Time To Talk About Hearing” report—to improve patient experience and relieve pressures on valuable national health service resources?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Having visited a glaucoma service on the high street, I recognise the benefits of such services to patients, as Elena Whitham outlined. We remain committed to our vision for an integrated community-based hearing service in Scotland. In considering the future direction for the sector, it is right that we move forward in step with the work of the independent review on audiology. That, together with the wider financial and strategic context in which we are currently operating, has necessitated the rephasing of our commitment on community hearing services. However, we continue to work with NHS, third sector and private providers to identify appropriate models for community care for any future service reform, and we are ensuring that those with lived experience inform that work.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

People in South Scotland continue to report to me that, a year after an independent review highlighted multiple systemic problems with NHS audiology services, they are still being left to navigate a bureaucratic maze just to get a proper diagnosis. Will the minister commit to dealing urgently with that bureaucratic maze?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I recognise the urgency that is required, which is why I am very pleased that the chief operating officer of NHS Scotland is leading the work with the task and finish group. I get regular updates on progress, as do members of that group and third sector organisations.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the annual performance of Social Security Scotland in 2023-24. (S6O-04003)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Social Security Scotland published its annual report and accounts and its charter measurement framework results this week. The findings show that 90 per cent of respondents said that their overall experience was very good or good. In the previous financial year, we paid more than £1.9 billion to people across Scotland. During that time, we launched the carer support payment nationally and a pilot for the pension-age disability payment. We now deliver 15 benefits, seven of which are available only in Scotland.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

Of the £1.9 billion that was issued in devolved social security payments across Scotland, more than £277 million was invested in Glasgow, including for my Glasgow Cathcart constituents. Will the cabinet secretary outline, for Glasgow and for Scotland as a whole, how much of Social Security Scotland’s investment went towards devolved benefits that are unique to Scotland and not available anywhere else in the United Kingdom, such as the transformative Scottish child payment?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

In 2023-24, Social Security Scotland invested £500 million in benefits that are unique to Scotland. Of that, £80 million was invested in the Glasgow city area. Our investment will support 1.4 million people this year—about one in four people in Scotland. Social Security Scotland’s benefits are helping to keep children out of poverty, assisting people to deal with rising living costs and supporting disabled people and those who devote their time to caring for others.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland’s latest report on road policing. (S6O-04004)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

My thoughts are with all those who have been affected by road deaths. I am grateful to HMICS for producing its report. Although it is for the chief constable to determine how to allocate her resources, I welcome the confirmation that the service is already taking action to address the issues that have been raised, including the identification and implementation of a sustainable model for road policing.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

It is quite clear that speed kills, and that communities across Scotland are fed up with dangerous speeding that goes undetected, unenforced and unpunished by the police and the courts. That is a rural problem but it is also an urban problem. Does the cabinet secretary believe that it is time to devolve responsibility for speed enforcement to councils, allowing communities to control dangerous speeding and creating a much-needed source of revenue to invest in safer streets?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

In terms of investment, I assure the member that road safety is a priority for the Scottish Government and Police Scotland, which is why we are investing a record £36 million this year to deliver initiatives that are aimed at improving driver behaviour and, ultimately, helping to reduce the number of casualties on our roads.

The member may also be aware of the new digital evidence-sharing capability system, which will enable members of the public to upload footage from mobile devices or computers, making it easier to share evidence, allowing swifter access to justice and helping cases to be resolved more quickly.

Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Bill: Financial Resolution

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-15551, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Bill. I remind members that, as per rule 11.3.1(h) of standing orders, the question on the motion will be put immediately after the motion is moved.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament, for the purposes of any Act of the Scottish Parliament resulting from the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Bill, agrees to any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3A of the Parliament’s Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act.—[Angela Constance]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The question is, that motion S6M-15551, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Bill, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

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

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on motion S6M-15551, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Bill, is: For 92, Against 30, Abstentions 0.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament, for the purposes of any Act of the Scottish Parliament resulting from the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Bill, agrees to any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3A of the Parliament’s Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The Auditor General’s latest report on the Scottish National Party Government’s spending and public services is absolutely scathing. He lays bare the risks that are facing critically important front-line services because of this Government’s lack of transparency. He says that the Scottish Government

“has not been sufficiently transparent with the Scottish Parliament or the public about the current fiscal situation.”

Why is John Swinney’s Government so addicted to secrecy and so disrespectful towards the paying public?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There are two points that I would make in response to Mr Findlay’s question. The first is on the question of fiscal sustainability. The Government has balanced the budget for every one of the 17 years that it has been in power and, as a consequence, we have lived within our means on every occasion that we have had a budget to balance.

The second point that I would make is on the question of transparency around the financial challenges that are facing the Parliament. I do not think that anyone listening to anything that ministers have said over the past 14 years could have in any way escaped the reality we have set out that the fiscal constraint of the austerity of the Conservatives has put unbearable burdens on our public finances and that this Government has delivered against that formidably difficult climate.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

That is just the usual SNP whataboutery. This is not the first independent investigation into SNP finances, and I am quite sure that it will not be the last.

The Auditor General says :

“The Scottish Government does not know what savings will result from reform, or what reform efforts will cost”.

I will put that into layman's terms: this chaotic Government does not have a clue. It does not know how much its plans will cost or even how much money it might save. Here is a chance for John Swinney to be more transparent. Does he have any idea—any idea at all—how much his proposed reforms will save taxpayers?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I said in my first answer, the Government has lived within the resources that are available to us. We have balanced the budget. Is that not evidence enough for Mr Findlay that this Government is able to manage the public finances whenever we have the opportunity to do so?

On 4 December, the Government will set out a budget to Parliament, which will be the accumulation of the choices that we have made about how we invest in our public services and what we ask people to pay to support those public services. That is the honest conversation that this Government has with the people of Scotland. That is what we have done in the past, and that is what we will do again on 4 December.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

John Swinney does not seem to have a clue. I commend the Auditor General’s report to him, because he clearly has not read it.

The Auditor General says that the Government has broken a commitment to deliver savings. If John Swinney would like to listen, I will quote extensively from the Auditor General. He says that there is no

“clear vision”

for improving public services; that

“the impact on outcomes is not currently considered or monitored”;

and that the Government

“is not providing effective leadership.”

Under the SNP, there is no leadership, no transparency and no answers; just broken promises, pathetic excuses and ministers making it up as they go along. That is what a John Swinney Government really looks like, does it not?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Russell Findlay might be in a slightly stronger position to argue his case—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Excuse me, First Minister. I ask members to refrain from interrupting those who have been called to speak.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Findlay might be in a slightly stronger position to provide analytical support to the Parliament if he had not been the person who argued that I should follow the example of Liz Truss. If I had followed the example of Liz Truss, we would have acute problems in the balancing of our budget this year, because Liz Truss and her loyal Scottish ally Russell Findlay would have taken us to the economic and fiscal disaster that she inflicted on the United Kingdom. All I can say is, thank goodness I never inflicted that on Scotland.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Dearie me. It is not my party that is under investigation for financial fraud and is sacking half its staff this week, for goodness’ sakes. John Swinney will leave public services even worse off and waste taxpayers’ money on a grand scale.

The Auditor General states it plainly:

“The Scottish Government cannot afford its current spending choices”.

Auditor General reports are like groundhog day. The same problems are laid bare year after year, but the SNP never, ever learns from its mistakes. Instead, we get broken SNP promises and broken public services. SNP ministers are casually wasting public money with absolutely no regard for hard-working taxpayers. Does the latest report not prove once and for all that John Swinney and the SNP cannot be trusted with our public finances?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Those issues will be considered as part of parliamentary consideration of the budget, which will come after 4 December, when the finance secretary sets out our proposals to the Parliament.

During the week, I got a letter from Mr Findlay setting out the financial propositions of the Conservative Party. On the one side, Mr Findlay argued for a tax cut that would cost, in his estimation—not mine—£1 billion, or £1,000 million. On the other side, Mr Findlay gave me a paragraph about the savings that will be delivered to achieve his £1,000 million tax cut. Those savings amounted to a grand total of £53.74 million. There is a £950 million gaping hole in Mr Findlay’s arguments to me this week. Do not dare come here and lecture me about public finances with the ineptitude that you demonstrated in your letter to me this week.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us ensure that we always speak through the chair.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Today we will debate emergency legislation on early prisoner release. If the SNP Government gets its way, hundreds of prisoners could be released from Scotland’s prisons before finishing less than half of their sentences. In England and Wales, our Labour Government is being forced to clear up the mess that was left by 14 years of the Tories. In Scotland, whose mess are John Swinney and the SNP clearing up?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is wrestling with a situation that is affecting many jurisdictions around the world, including the rest of the United Kingdom. In the aftermath of Covid, we have seen a sharp increase in the prison population as a consequence of the work to address the delays in the court and tribunal system.

The Government has introduced legislation to address those issues and to ensure that we have in place a set of mechanisms that will ensure that our prisons are safe for those who are working in them and safe in the public interest. Those are the proposals that Parliament will consider.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I asked whose mess the SNP was cleaning up—the answer is that it was clearing up its own mess from the past 17 years. The fact is that, in Scotland, the justice system has been independent for ever and the SNP has been in charge of it for 17 years. The emergency legislation is a desperate attempt to tackle the symptoms of a crisis that was created by the SNP.

On John Swinney’s watch, we have Scotland’s prisons at breaking point, our prison estate crumbling, soaring levels of remand, deep cuts to legal aid, a staffing crisis in our courts and huge court backlogs. Warning after warning has been ignored from the chief inspector of prisons, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, Community Justice Scotland, Victim Support Scotland and the Scottish Prison Service. Why does John Swinney think that, after 17 years of failure, the answer is to give more power through emergency legislation to the incompetent SNP Government that has failed to manage and reform our criminal justice system?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

On the question of investment and reform in our criminal justice system, I will give Mr Sarwar some facts. We have increased investment in justice through a 10 per cent increase in the prison services resource budget for this year alone. In relation to community justice, which is another issue that Mr Sarwar raised, we expanded the investment in community justice this year by £14 million, to a total of £148 million, in order to further strengthen the alternatives to custody, which is exactly the direction of travel that Mr Sarwar is trying to suggest that we should pursue. In addition, we have increased the use of electronically monitored bail, which is one of the key issues in relation to remand. As a consequence of the reforms that we enacted in the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024, we have been able to free up accommodation in HM Young Offenders Institution Polmont to accommodate more prisoners.

The Government is taking the action on reform that is required to address a situation that is affecting all jurisdictions, which is the post-Covid increase in the number of prisoners. Parliament has had discussions about the steps being taken, including approaches to the advice on the pursuit of remand, which the Lord Advocate set out to the Parliament. That is just one of a number of interventions that are being made to address the significant issue that Mr Sarwar raises with me.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister has his head in the sand. Just this morning, the Auditor General said that

“the Scottish Government is not providing effective leadership on reform”

and that it is

“reacting to events rather than making fundamental changes”.

He also warned that the Government is keeping the public in the dark about the scale of the crisis in our public services. Despite that, just two weeks ago, John Swinney said that there was no need for a change in direction.

After 17 years of SNP Government, every institution is weaker. Our national health service is in crisis, with one in six Scots on a waiting list. Our education system is in crisis, with standards falling. Our housing system is in crisis, with 10,000 children living in temporary accommodation. Our justice system is in crisis, with victims being failed. The need for reform and a new direction has never been clearer. Why is it that John Swinney and the SNP offer only more excuses, a focus on inputs, more incompetence, more waste, and managed decline?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As ever, Mr Sarwar skates past some of the evidence on all those issues. Let us take housing, for example. Mr Sarwar knows full well that the Government’s record is that we have built more affordable houses per head of population than in any other part of the United Kingdom in recent years, in the face of the unbridled austerity of the Conservatives. We have seen increases in activity in the national health service in operations and in the number of day cases that are being undertaken to erode the waiting lists that have accumulated as a consequence of Covid.

Of course, there are challenges with public finances. On almost every occasion since I took office in May, I have rehearsed to the Parliament in my answers to First Minister’s questions the challenges in respect of the public finances. Mr Sarwar has taken issue with the challenges that I have outlined in that respect.

However, let us look at the budget issues with which we are wrestling now. Yesterday in Parliament, we debated employers’ national insurance contributions where we find that, while the Labour Government is offering increases in funding that amount to 1 per cent in our budget—£400 million—once inflation is taken into account, we are, on the other hand, facing an increase in employers’ national insurance contributions of £600 million.

What we have, therefore, is a Labour Government in London giving with the one hand and taking away with the other. That is austerity by the back door, and that is what Labour is delivering to Scotland.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

In Scotland, there are more than 10,000 deaths a year as a direct result of alcohol, tobacco and obesity. Minimum unit pricing for alcohol in Scotland reduces the harms from cheap booze, but at present it is supermarkets and large retailers that profit from the increased price of alcohol, while our national health service is struggling. That is why the Scottish Greens, when we were in Government, secured a commitment to reintroduce a levy on retailers who profit from the sale of alcohol and tobacco, which would help to fund NHS services.

Can the First Minister confirm whether his Government still supports a public health levy, and whether it will be included in the draft budget when that is published in two weeks’ time?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Those issues are very important, and Lorna Slater raises an important question about the impact of tobacco and alcohol misuse on the health of the population. The Government has taken significant action in relation to minimum unit pricing, and we will continue to focus on measures to tackle this significant issue.

As to the question of a public health supplement, that will be considered as part of the budget process. Of course, I am not at liberty to comment on those issues until the budget comes to Parliament in December.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

This week, an alliance of 24 Scottish health organisations have backed the Scottish Greens’ calls for a public health levy in this year’s budget, and polling shows that a majority of the public support it, too. The Fraser of Allander Institute estimates that a levy could raise as much as £57 million a year—money that could pay for smoking cessation programmes, breastfeeding support in communities or increased screening programmes for cancer.

Why, therefore, does the First Minister equivocate on the matter? He has had a whole year in which to design and consult on a new public health levy, so why is it not ready to be introduced now? How will the First Minister respond to organisations calling for its urgent roll-out?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I point out to Lorna Slater that the Government already has in place higher business taxes on larger retailers. That is a source of great controversy, but we have it in place already, which takes into account some of the issues that Lorna Slater raises with me.

Lorna Slater also has to accept that I cannot disclose today the contents of a Government budget that has not yet been finalised. It will be finalised a week on Wednesday. It will be set out to Parliament and there will then be an opportunity for Parliament to debate those issues.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

To ask the First Minister when the Scottish Government last met with Ineos or Petroineos to discuss the refinery at Grangemouth. (S6F-03558)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government continues to engage regularly with key stakeholders, following the announcement by Petroineos that it intends to cease refining at Grangemouth. The Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy last met the business on 5 November, and Government officials met staff in the business last week.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

Yesterday, Unite the union gave evidence to the Economy and Fair Work Committee. In Unite’s view, Grangemouth is a “profitable” site, and “a distorted picture” has been given from the accounts available. It believes that there can be no justification for a closure now, and that money spent to support a bio-refinery will be wasted if the underlying skill base is lost.

The UK Government, with its inaction, has much to answer for, but will the First Minister commit to working on a pause in the closure, and not accept the loss of that national strategic asset without a clearer path to a just transition?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recently met Derek Thomson of Unite to discuss the very issues that Michelle Thomson puts to me. She will be aware that the Scottish Government believes that the announcement of the closure of the refinery is a premature decision, and that it accelerates a change that does not need to take place at this stage, but which could be managed over a number of further years to enable us to put more alternatives in place.

Michelle Thomson asked me whether I would support a pause in plans to close the refinery, and I do support that. I have put that point to the Prime Minister and expressed the Scottish Government’s willingness to work with the United Kingdom Government to find a way to work with the company to avoid the premature closure of the refinery. That will be the Scottish Government’s position as we continue to work with the UK Government and the company to try to avoid economic disruption and damage to the Grangemouth area and especially to the livelihoods of the workers who are involved.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The refinery is scheduled to close in quarter 2, skilled workers are already leaving the area—the very people who are needed for the transition—and project willow will not report until later next year. If we cannot have the full willow report sooner, can we see an interim report much, much sooner? Which projects in the growth deal can be expedited to tackle the immediate threat to nearly 3,000 jobs?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not think that I could commit to earlier publication of the project willow report. In essence, that is why, in my answer to Michelle Thomson, I argued for more time to reach a situation where other credible opportunities can be pursued. Such opportunities take time to develop. From the Government’s perspective, the important point is that the closure of the refinery needs to be delayed. That is the Scottish Government’s position.

With regard to other potential proposals, I have set out to Parliament the importance that I see in the investment in the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, which would provide significant opportunities to the Grangemouth site. I was very disappointed that we did not get any progress on the issue in the United Kingdom budget in late October. I made that point again to the Prime Minister, because I believe that the Acorn project would provide us with significant opportunity to take forward and address Mr Kerr’s significant point.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

It is beginning to look as though the First Minister has accepted defeat with regard to Scotland’s ever becoming an independent country, because, under his watch, Scotland will become the only top-25 oil-producing nation that has no refining capacity. How has it come to this—that a nationalist Government looks away, helpless, as key national infrastructure is lost for ever?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not think that Ash Regan has listened to a word that I have said in response to Michelle Thomson or Stephen Kerr, because I said that I am actively pursuing an option to maintain the refining capacity at Grangemouth. If that needs to be stated again, I will state it again to Parliament so that it is clearly understood.

Economic damage will be done if there is no intervention to prolong the life of the refinery at Grangemouth. If we do that, we will have the opportunity to secure carbon capture and storage and to take forward the other projects through the project willow exercise. That will provide a secure future for the Grangemouth site. Let there be no doubt about it: the Scottish Government is actively pursuing these opportunities to protect the workers at Grangemouth.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the First Minister, in light of reported figures that over 2,000 people were killed or seriously injured on Scotland’s roads last year, what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether 2024 could see the highest number of road accidents and fatalities on record. (S6F-03550)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I express my sympathies to everyone who has been affected by the loss of a loved one and to anyone who has been injured on our roads. The published finalised road casualty statistics for 2023 showed that the number of people killed on Scotland’s roads fell to 155. That is the fourth-lowest annual figure and the second-lowest figure recorded in a non-pandemic year.

However, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has previously highlighted the significant road challenges that we face in 2024. Road safety remains a top priority for the Scottish Government, which is why we are investing £36 million this financial year in a broad range of initiatives that are aimed at improving driver behaviour and reducing road casualties.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I agree that one death on our roads is one death too many. Too many families have lost loved ones on Scotland’s roads. It is incumbent on us all to see that trajectory go down and not up this year or in future years. However, the reality of Scotland’s roads is that there is a £2.5 billion backlog of repairs. That does not include what is necessary to upgrade or improve some of the accident hotspots, such as the A9, A96 and A77.

Bearing in mind that 65 per cent of road deaths occur on rural roads, action is needed, and it is needed fast. Is the First Minister’s Government still fully committed to fully dualling every single road that it promised the public that it would dual in its manifestos? How many more lives will be needlessly lost while we wait for that to happen?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government remains committed to its investment programme. We will take the action to support road safety measures that I set out in my earlier answer. The transport secretary is actively involved in dealing with many of those questions, and she hosted a road safety summit in February this year to review all current road safety measures. That will remain a very focused part of the agenda that the transport secretary and the Government take forward.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

On Tuesday this week, yet another person lost his life in an incident on the A9, and three more people had to be taken to hospital. The Road Safety Foundation has produced evidence that people are three times more likely to lose their lives in an incident on a single-carriageway road than on a dual-carriageway road, and are a staggering 10 times more likely to lose their lives on a single-track road as opposed to a motorway. That means that families in the Highlands in the north of Scotland are 10 times more likely than those in the central belt to lose somebody to a road death. Therefore, will the First Minister make proposals for the swifter dualling of the A9 so that fewer people die? Will he obtemper the promise that was made to the cross-party delegation of MSPs that I led and that met him in June, a full five months ago, when he said that he would give serious consideration to the matter?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise the seriousness and significance of the issue. The incident to which Mr Ewing refers took place in my parliamentary constituency, just to the south of Ballinluig. The Government has already invested in dualling a number of stretches of the A9. When I was travelling on the A9 on Monday, I saw the beginnings of the work that is under way on the next stretch of the road to be dualled, which is the Moy to Tomatin stretch.

As I indicated to Parliament in June, the Government will keep the programme under review to identify whether there is any way that we can move at a faster rate. Officials are in the process of considering the implications of resequencing or accelerating completion of the A9 dualling programme. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport has asked that a report on the findings of that work be published when it is complete.

I take the opportunity to extend my sympathies to the family of the individual who lost their life on the A9 on Tuesday, and to all those who were affected by the incident.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

This week is United Kingdom road safety week, which is organised by Brake. The Scottish Government road safety framework included a commitment to hold a Scottish road safety week each year. The first took place in March 2022, but there has not been another one. Has that commitment been dropped?

The Scottish Government also committed to raising a national conversation on road safety in 2022. When can we expect to see any progress on that, given that Transport Scotland says that it receives no resources to deliver either of those initiatives?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government works closely with Brake to provide support to victims of road crashes. Officials last met the organisation earlier this month, on 1 November. In addition, the Government hosted a road safety summit in February 2024 to review all current road safety measures and to help to identify new strategies to support action towards our 2030 casualty reduction targets.

We will work constructively with different organisations that represent victims of road traffic incidents to ensure that they are well supported in addressing the points that Claire Baker puts to me.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reported calls to widen access to Scotland’s redress scheme to allow survivors of abuse at Fornethy house to seek redress. (S6F-03553)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am profoundly sorry to hear what the survivors of abuse at Fornethy house endured and the impact that abuse has had on their lives. I again praise the courage of the survivors in sharing their experiences.

Scotland’s redress scheme was designed primarily for vulnerable children who were in long-term care, often isolated, with limited or no contact with their families. Children who were resident on a short-term basis were not in that position. The eligibility criteria for the redress scheme were extensively debated during the passage of the Redress for Survivors (Historical Child Abuse in Care) (Scotland) Act 2021, and the eligibility criteria were included in the purpose of the scheme.

That does not diminish the heartbreaking abuse that the Fornethy survivors faced. The Deputy First Minister met the survivors to explain the decision to them directly and will continue to engage with them.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

First Minister, words are not enough. In January 2023, the First Minister told the Education, Children and Young People Committee that it was

“possible for Fornethy survivors to be successful in applying under the scheme.”—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 12 January 2023; c 14.]

Now, his Government is saying that they will not be successful because it was so-called “short-term care” under arrangements that involved parents.

Is it not the reality that the length of time of any abuse is irrelevant? Abuse is abuse. Those wee girls were sent to Fornethy as a result of clear direction from the state. They were cut off from their parents and subjected to unimaginable physical, mental and, in some cases, sexual abuse by staff who were employed by the state. However, the state has utterly failed to take responsibility.

First Minister, will your Government now take responsibility? Will it do the right thing and widen access to the redress scheme for those brave survivors?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise the significance and seriousness of the issue. As the person who took the bill through Parliament, I did all that I could during the parliamentary passage of the bill to ensure that the scheme that we brought forward was as extensive and comprehensive as it could be.

I made the comments to which Mr Smyth referred during an evidence session with the Education, Children and Young People Committee when public authorities were still researching the bases on which and circumstances in which children were placed in Fornethy house. Those factors would have a bearing on eligibility for the redress scheme that Parliament approved.

The independent research that was undertaken as part of the commitments that were made to the Fornethy survivors reported that, according to such records as exist, children were primarily placed in Fornethy house for short-term care with the agreement of their parents. That is fundamentally different from the circumstances that the Parliament legislated for in the scheme.

Fornethy house will be a case study in the next phase of the Scottish child abuse inquiry, and there will be an opportunity for further exploration of the issues and the circumstances involved in those cases.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to general and constituency supplementary questions.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

With energy prices set to rise again in January, households across Scotland will be facing significant pressures when it comes to heating their homes this winter. During the election campaign, Labour promised to cut fuel bills by £300. Instead, bills have gone up, and although the Scottish Government is delivering the low-income winter heating payment and other initiatives to support those who are most in need, the United Kingdom Labour Government is callously cutting the winter fuel payment to pensioners. Will the First Minister join me in calling on the UK Government to make good on its manifesto commitment to tackle rising fuel bills and reverse its winter fuel cut?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I think that members of the public will be stunned that a Labour Government that promised to reduce fuel bills by an average of £300 has seen those bills increase in October, with the likelihood of further increases coming in January. To compound that difficult situation, the withdrawal of the winter heating payment means that more than 400,000 people on low incomes who have been eligible for that entitlement will lose it.

It is a very serious situation that pensioners in particular in our society are facing. I make the plea today, because it is absolutely central to what we need to do, that we get the UK Government to reverse the unwarranted cut in winter fuel payments, which is damaging the livelihoods and circumstances of pensioners in Scotland.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

This week, shocking figures on domestic abuse were released, which indicated that the number of cases reported to Police Scotland had risen by 3 per cent and equalled almost 64,000 cases—that is one incident every 10 minutes. Behind every number is a terrible real life story. Next week marks the beginning of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence. However, those latest horrific statistics show that we are moving backwards, not forwards. When will the Scottish Government stand with survivors and take concrete action to eliminate domestic abuse by supporting my proposed domestic abuse (prevention) (Scotland) bill, which will protect victims of domestic abuse and has been backed by organisations and survivors?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is engaging with Pam Gosal on her bill. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs had a productive meeting with her on 25 September, and we will consider full details when we have further detail on the component parts of the bill.

On Pam Gosal’s comments about the Government’s approach to domestic abuse, I remind Parliament that the Government introduced—and Parliament supported—the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018, which was implemented in the subsequent year. That act strengthened the legal protection for victims of domestic abuse and significantly increased the constraints on any perpetrators of domestic abuse.

The figures to which Pam Gosal referred are unacceptable, but they indicate that more individuals are coming forward to report offences and to ensure that the perpetrators of domestic violence are brought to account. Fundamentally, men’s behaviour must change, and the Government will put in place the legislative framework to enable that to be the case. Domestic violence must come to an end, and that will happen only when the behaviour of men changes.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

This week, The Herald has been running an excellent series to highlight the crisis in legal aid. It is not only in criminal legal aid that lawyers are abandoning their profession, but in civil legal aid. Four out of five lawyers who work in civil legal aid in Glasgow will no longer take on protective order cases for victims of domestic abuse. In 1999, lawyers accepted the principle of one fee of £500 for work on a single case; 25 years later, that fee is only £572, and more work is required, which has resulted in many young lawyers entering the legal profession with better options, including the Crown Office.

Does the First Minister accept that this is a crisis and that it would be reprehensible if domestic abuse victims could not access a lawyer? Does he agree that the way forward is for Scotland to invest in the whole legal aid system—in fact, the whole justice system—by an annual uprating of fees and by invigorating the trainee scheme to encourage young lawyers to choose that branch of the legal profession to demonstrate that there is a future for legal aid in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is essential that young lawyers who are emerging into the legal profession enter a variety of elements of that profession. The points that Pauline McNeill has made in that respect are absolutely valid.

Evidence from the Scottish Legal Aid Board shows that cases that involve allegations of domestic abuse are coming through the judicial system. That is welcome, because it is important for those who are reporting potential crimes to see those crimes pursued as part of the judicial system.

The Government will engage actively on questions in relation to the future of legal aid. We recognise that reform is needed in the legal aid system, which is why our document “The Vision for Justice in Scotland” contains an action plan to reform it. We will take forward the actions that are set out in that document.

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

It is now more than 1,000 days since Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine—1,000 days of courageous resistance and sacrifice by the Ukrainian people. How has the Scottish Government supported Ukrainians, and what assurance can the First Minister give that Scotland will continue to stand in solidarity with Ukraine for as long as it takes?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I thank Colin Beattie for raising the issue and reminding the Parliament that it is now more than 1,000 days since the illegal invasion of Ukraine. There is absolutely no justification for the invasion, and the Russian aggression must be repelled.

Scotland has stood in solidarity with Ukraine. We have provided sanctuary to more than 28,000 people who were sponsored by the Scottish Government or an individual in Scotland to come to this country. More than 21,000 of those arrivals are part of the Scottish Government’s support scheme. We have invested heavily in providing the support that is available to Ukrainian refugees to come here, and I make it clear that those Ukrainian refugees are welcome in Scotland and play an important part in our country.

I reiterate the unacceptability of the illegal invasion of Ukraine, the determination to stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian population and the need to repel the Russian aggression. That is a necessity in our modern world today.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Due to factors including a sustained decline in public funding, Robert Gordon University might have to make up to 135 redundancies. The University of Dundee, with a £30 million deficit, has said that redundancies are inevitable. The University of Edinburgh warns of job cuts in response to unsustainable funding. Anton Muscatelli, the outgoing principal of the University of Glasgow, has asked why our Government should not

“properly fund higher education for our own students?”

Will the First Minister answer him by agreeing to an open-minded, cross-party, multistakeholder collaboration on university resourcing, or does the First Minister prefer ideological purity and redundancies?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I prefer to invest in the university system, which the Government does, with £1 billion of public expenditure and a commitment to work collaboratively with the university sector to ensure that Scotland’s research excellence can be deployed as part of the overall economic approach in Scotland. Innovation and creativity lie at the heart of taking forward the fantastic elements of research that come from our university community.

What is not helping our universities just now is the fact that they face a significant increase in employer national insurance contributions. That is the point that has been made by the principal of the University of Edinburgh: the shock to the university’s finances of the United Kingdom Government’s unilateral action in increasing employer NI contributions. It is another argument for why that particular policy approach by the UK Government needs to be reversed.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

The First Minister might have seen reports that airport travel company CAVU, which has taken over a passenger lounge at Edinburgh airport, intends to make 16 people redundant by exploiting a loophole in the law rather than undertaking the usual Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations—TUPE—transfers that one might expect. Does the First Minister agree not only that that is morally reprehensible but that, at a time of tight labour markets, such fire and rehire practice is entirely counterproductive for anyone seeking to be a responsible employer?

I have already written to the chief executive of CAVU to ask him to reconsider putting people out of work just weeks before Christmas. Will the First Minister do likewise?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Obviously, in any circumstances of that nature, the Government’s commitment is to the fair work principles, which should be applied in all circumstances by all employers in Scotland. I encourage the employer who is involved in the case that Mr Johnson puts to me to do exactly that.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Last week, the Post Office announced the closure of all 115 Crown post office branches that are owned directly by the United Kingdom Labour Government, with the loss of up to 1,000 jobs. One of the 10 Scottish branches that are slated for closure is in Saltcoats, which is in my constituency.

Post offices provide a range of vital services—vital particularly to older people who are less comfortable with technology. The loss of services and jobs will be felt keenly. Will the First Minister outline what representations the Scottish Government is making to UK ministers to save these important community resources?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the point that Mr Gibson puts to me. The provision of access to post office services in communities is crucial in ensuring that there is an effective network available. We will certainly make sure that the representations that Mr Gibson has made to me today are taken up with the United Kingdom Government, so that all constituents, especially those to whom Mr Gibson referred, have access to a viable and effective network of postal services in Scotland that meets their needs.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The First Minister will be aware of the recently published “Valuing Carers” report, which highlights that, according to data collated from the 2022 census, the value of unpaid carers to Scotland is £15.9 billion, which is not far short of the total national health service budget for 2022. Will the First Minister join me in recognising the contribution of unpaid carers? What more can the Scottish Government do to ensure that they are properly supported?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am happy to associate myself with Mr Whittle’s comments. Last Friday morning, as part of the lead-up to carers week, I met a group of carers’ representatives in my constituency. I listened with care to the issues that they raised with me.

The Government has put in place, for example, measures to support short-term breaks for carers and measures to enhance carers allowance. We will reflect on such issues as we consider the contents of the Government’s budget.

I agree whole-heartedly with Mr Whittle that the contribution that is made by carers is absolutely fundamental to the delivery of care support in households and communities around the country. We simply could not provide the level of care that is provided by unpaid carers to support their loved ones and our society in these days.

Point of Order

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. On 19 November, The National newspaper printed an article that criticised my decision to raise concerns about the fact that LGBT Youth Scotland, which is an organisation that is geared towards young people between the ages of 13 and 25, not children of primary school age, is working with two primary schools in my area of Milngavie on a pilot programme. I raised those concerns in a letter to the council’s chief executive after being contacted by—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Ms Gosal, a point of order should be raised when a member has concerns about whether proper procedures are being or have been followed in an item of business.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

I have such concerns. I am going to come to that, Presiding Officer. Sorry about that.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Please do.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Maggie Chapman MSP made comments in which she stated that I am

“categorically more of a risk to children than LGBT Youth Scotland’s project in primary schools”.

I view that as clear defamation of my character. I hope, therefore, that Maggie Chapman will apologise and retract the comments.

Presiding Officer, were you aware of the comments by Maggie Chapman MSP? If not, now that you have heard them, do you believe that they conform with paragraphs 5 and 6, on the treatment of others, of section 7 of the code of conduct for MSPs?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Ms Gosal, I am sure that you will be aware that I wish all members of Parliament to treat one another with courtesy and respect at all times. Articles that have appeared in newspapers are not subjects that I would necessarily expect to be raised as points of order.

The next item of business is a members’ business debate in the name of Roz McCall. There will now be a short suspension to allow people to leave the chamber and the public gallery.

Stroke Awareness

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-15065, in the name of Roz McCall, on increasing stroke awareness. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes reports that nearly 11,000 people in Scotland have a stroke every year, including in the Mid Scotland and Fife region; further notes the belief that raising public awareness of stroke signs and the need for immediate action is essential to improving health outcomes for stroke survivors; understands that the FAST (Face, Arms, Speech, Time) stroke awareness campaign undertaken by Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland, which launched on World Stroke Day on 29 October 2024, is aimed at increasing awareness among the public of the need for urgent medical attention for stroke; further understands the importance of repetition in any public health campaign; regrets that there has been no sustained government-backed campaign in Scotland, it understands, since before the COVID-19 pandemic; notes the calls from campaign groups to review public health messaging surrounding awareness of stroke symptoms, including the work of the BE-FAST (Balance, Eyes, Face, Arms, Speech, Time) campaign, which some academic research suggests detects 95.6% of strokes and is the acronym currently favoured by Harvard Medical School and Yale School of Medicine; notes the calls on the Scottish Government to work with Public Health Scotland and NHS boards to trial BE-FAST, in order to assess its effectiveness using data, which, it considers, would allow for informed decisions to be taken regarding the efficacy of current public health messaging, and further notes the hope that all stroke awareness campaigns can continue to increase awareness of the need for urgent medical attention should a patient present with any symptoms associated with stroke.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank members from all parties for supporting my motion and allowing it to be debated.

As members are aware, my interest in stroke comes from personal experience. In 2021, my husband collapsed and it transpired that he had suffered a haemorrhagic stroke. I was aware of the face, arms, speech, time—or FAST—stroke awareness campaign but, because he was lying face down on the floor, it was not possible for me to see the effect that the stroke had had on him. Thankfully, he was processed at speed and that speed, and the skilled hands of the surgeon, saved his life.

Having a stroke is a life-changing event. Stroke affects around 11,000 people in Scotland every year and more than 136,000 people are living with the long-term consequences of stroke. My husband shows signs of stroke fatigue every day and those are far more pronounced on busy days when he has had more to do and is battling internally to complete tasks. The on-going effects of stroke are not widely known and he still gets strange looks when he has to take a little extra time to walk downstairs in public or navigate the aisles of a supermarket.

The Scottish stroke care audit highlighted stroke as the third most common cause of death in Scotland and the most common cause of severe physical disability for adults. The provision of hospital care for those patients accounts for 7 per cent of all national health service beds and 5 per cent of the entire NHS budget.

It does not have to be like that. We know that receiving medical treatment quickly is linked to better treatment, reduced damage and improved outcomes, many of which are clinical, but the Scottish Government has not done enough to make the clinical process faster and more available, especially in our hospitals.

Awareness is also essential and it remains a simple fact that clinical services cannot be efficiently utilised unless we can identify the symptoms of stroke and act fast. Concerning figures from a YouGov poll commissioned by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland reveal that 39 per cent of adults—a figure that increases to 53 per cent of 18 to 24-year-olds—are not familiar with FAST. That is why I take the opportunity to congratulate organisations such as the Stroke Association and Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland for their continued work to raise awareness.

A special mention must go today to Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland for its current FAST campaign, which illustrates three of the most common symptoms of stroke and highlights the importance of acting quickly to call the emergency services. The F tells us to look at the face and notice whether the person can smile and the A reminds us to check whether the person can lift both arms. The S gets us to check whether the person can speak clearly and the T tells us when it is time to call 999.That campaign has been solely funded by CHSS and, in the first week alone, reached a phenomenal 5.4 million people.

Regular repetition of public health messaging is key, so it is disappointing that it took action by a charity to launch that public campaign, especially when priority number 2 in the Scottish Government’s 2023 stroke improvement plan was awareness raising. The plan stated:

“We will work to understand current public awareness of stroke symptoms, and the action required when they occur, and support the delivery of FAST campaigns.”

I recognise that the pandemic affected public health messaging and that a national campaign might not have had the desired effect when the improvement plan was initially drawn up. However, I ask the cabinet secretary to reflect that we are now in the last months of 2024. Given the alarming statistics that I mentioned in relation to the number of adults who are aware of FAST, I ask the Scottish Government to rethink its approach to public health campaigns.

I could talk on this subject for hours, but I want to take the opportunity before I finish to highlight the work of the BE FAST campaign group, which is working to expand Scotland’s stroke awareness from FAST to BE FAST—balance, eyes, face, arms, speech, time—by adding balance and eyes to the stroke symptoms. That follows the sudden passing of Anthony James Bundy, who was 53 years old when he suffered a fatal stroke with symptoms outside FAST. In that case, clinicians ruled out stroke after various FAST tests were completed, unfortunately leading to that fatal stroke after a five-and-a-half-hour wait in an accident and emergency department in a Scottish hospital.

The crux of the campaign is that less-common symptoms can occur in some individuals, such as changes to balance or the eyes, which could mean misdiagnosis or delay in treatment. I understand the concerns of clinicians and charities that BE FAST may diminish the focus on the three main symptoms of stroke and I understand that the evidence is not yet there to support it, but it is the “yet” that matters. Anything that could prevent loss of life should be looked at seriously. I look forward to the evidence being collated so that, eventually, any loss of life or subsequent disability from stroke becomes a thing of the past.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

We move to the open debate and I ask for speeches of up to four minutes. We will start again at 2 pm this afternoon and the staff need time to clear the chamber.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I thank Roz McCall MSP for bringing this debate to the chamber and for sharing her personal story with us. I know that the subject is close to her heart.

As Roz McCall highlighted, stroke is the third most common cause of death in Scotland and it is on the rise. People are surviving for longer, but those who are suffering stroke are getting younger. A study in Oxford found that, between 2010 and 2018, there was a 67 per cent rise in strokes among under-55s. It also found that there had been a significant rise in the proportion of people in professional and managerial jobs having strokes and it suggested that work-related stress, low physical activity and long working hours could be contributing to that. Blood pressure is the biggest single factor, and the importance of that could be addressed with increased awareness of symptoms of stroke and the risk factors.

Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland has emphasised the importance of regular repetition of public health messaging. As has been noted, 39 per cent of adults in Scotland are unaware of the signs of strokes or the FAST mnemonic. Among 18 to 24-year-olds, the figure goes up to 53 per cent. It is important for people to have that knowledge, because the signs of a stroke do not necessarily look like an emergency. It would be good to hear from the cabinet secretary how the Government will support the campaign and, crucially, how we will engage with younger people. We can all play our part by making sure that we use our platforms to share the campaign widely among our constituents. The more people who are able to recognise the signs of a stroke and take immediate action, the better. Earlier treatment means a greater chance of recovery, and the first three hours are especially crucial.

Roz McCall also discussed the mnemonic BE FAST, which adds balance and eyes. Although that is used in some parts of the US, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland has suggested that there is just not enough evidence that it works. It points to a previous trial of BE FAST in Scotland that led to a high number of non-stroke issues being identified as emergencies.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Does Evelyn Tweed agree that it is better that people present themselves if they suspect that they may be having a stroke on the basis of the BE FAST mnemonic, rather than not going and ending up where, sadly, too many cases have ended up?

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I hear the point that Stephen Kerr is making, but we have to look at everything in the round. If clinicians say that they feel overwhelmed by the use of that terminology, we need to take that into account. I will say more about that.

The situation that I described led in turn to stroke clinicians feeling overwhelmed. Importantly, the symptoms in FAST are specific to stroke—they are unlikely to be anything else. Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland says that the symptoms of posterior strokes, which are more likely to impact eyes and balance, can be mistaken for other things.

Patients need to be triaged effectively to ensure appropriate diagnosis and care. I have heard from my constituents that it took time for their strokes to be diagnosed. In those cases, their symptoms differed from the most common ones.

Although BE FAST may not necessarily be the solution, I am glad to hear that Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland is working with the Scottish Government to expand its education for professionals. That education will include an awareness and understanding of the less common symptoms of stroke that BE FAST incorporates.

The Stroke Association highlights that

“stroke is preventable, treatable and recoverable.”

Indeed, nine out of 10 strokes are preventable. It is also important to raise awareness of preventative measures. For example, two hours of walking per week can reduce the risk of stroke by up to 30 per cent. Two hours of walking a week seems such a small thing to do, but it could have great consequences for people’s health.

Quitting smoking, cutting down on alcohol and eating a balanced diet can all contribute to a lowered stroke risk. Scotland’s 2023—

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Ms Tweed, will you please bring your remarks to a close? I have said that there is a bit of time pressure at this session. Thank you.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I look forward to seeing how work will be taken forward.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am delighted to contribute to the debate, and I commend my colleague Roz McCall for securing time to debate what is an important campaign.

When it comes to stroke, time is of the essence. Being able to quickly detect a stroke can mean the difference between a person’s full recovery and the loss of their life. I am therefore delighted to support and assist with the Bundy family’s BE FAST campaign, which seeks to expand the stroke awareness signs by adding balance and eyes to the list of symptoms.

When Tony Bundy suffered a stroke in 2023, the limitations of the current FAST test system meant that his stroke was not detected until too late. Tragically, that meant that Tony Bundy’s stroke was fatal. The lesson that we can learn from Tony’s tragic passing is that the early detection of a stroke can save lives. It is important that the Government listens to the campaign and ensures that future stroke policy is always based on the most up-to-date evidence.

As the BE FAST campaign highlights, a wealth of evidence needs to be considered. For example, the campaign speaks about research by the Scottish Parliament information centre, which found that the FAST test may miss up to 40 per cent of strokes. The BE FAST test may play an important role in the diagnosis of certain types of stroke.

It is safer for someone to decide to go to A and E and be told that they have not had a stroke than for them to sit at home and dismiss their symptoms until it is too late because those symptoms do not fall into the FAST criteria.

Given the compelling case for BE FAST, I believe that there should be a trial of the criteria in the national health service in Scotland. I look forward to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care covering that in his summing up, because the right decisions at the right time are vitally important. Possibly, a single health board could begin to look at a trial. I know that the Government is keen to listen, and that suggestion was discussed when I met the cabinet secretary and the Bundy family. I hope that the Government is now able to take action and work with Public Health Scotland and other health boards to allow a trial of those criteria to be looked at. A trial period in one health board area could allow data to be collated on the benefits of BE FAST. Data is vital in ensuring that we have facilities and information for stakeholders and those who work in the system, and it could be used to make an informed decision about stroke policy across the whole of the NHS.

Regardless of the outcomes of the BE FAST campaign, it is clear that it has already been effective in shining a light on the importance of stroke awareness. I have felt privileged to help the Bundy family in supporting Tony’s memory. That tragic example shows us all the necessity of such awareness. I have no doubt that members from across the chamber will join me in wishing the whole Bundy family well in the future. I urge the Scottish Government to listen to the campaign and to treat it with the seriousness that it deserves, because saving people is what we should be trying to achieve.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank Roz McCall for bringing this significant issue to the attention of the Parliament. This is an important debate, and I am sure that many members will be able to speak about personal experiences, as it is estimated that more than half of Scotland’s adult population have a close personal connection to someone who has had a stroke.

Given the time constraints, I will not make some of the remarks that I was intending to, as many members have given the reasons why urgency is so important. It is critical that public awareness campaigns that focus on identifying stroke symptoms are supported and, of course, adequately resourced. It will be good to hear what the cabinet secretary has to say about that in his closing remarks.

The national FAST stroke awareness campaign, which is led by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, offers a chance to increase awareness of the importance of seeking medical help as soon as possible when people experience stroke symptoms. In the event of a stroke, timing is critical. The treatments of thrombolysis and thrombectomy are time sensitive, so awareness of symptoms is important. In my region, 10 patients received such treatment quickly in a local hospital in the NHS Ayrshire and Arran health board area, so I understand that it is important to invest in public awareness campaigns so that people get to hospitals whenever they can.

Public awareness campaigns are imperative not only in promoting health behaviours but in providing greater awareness of symptoms and the link with improved health outcomes. It is imperative that the Government invests in prevention to improve health outcomes across Scotland, especially in our most deprived communities, because people living in those areas are more likely to have experienced a major cardiovascular event, such as a stroke.

A key aspect of prevention is awareness raising, so the Scottish Government must recognise the importance of health awareness campaigns and listen to charities that are calling on the Government to deliver the priorities that are set out in the “Stroke Improvement Plan 2023”.

We have heard about the very important FAST campaign. Although strokes are generally more prevalent among the older population, the number of younger people who are experiencing strokes is increasing, so we need to make such campaigns accessible to that generation.

Roz McCall’s motion mentions the BE FAST campaign, and I absolutely recognise what she has said in promoting the effectiveness of that campaign. It is encouraging to hear about it, and I urge the Scottish Government to explore the campaign’s effectiveness and to consider how we can add it to our prevention and awareness campaigns.

I hope that the main message from the debate is clear: we need action as soon as possible, and we all want this to be a priority. Therefore, I ask the cabinet secretary to respond favourably.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

I, too, thank Roz McCall for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I echo the thanks to the Bundy family for their campaigning efforts after their own tragedy. I have had the privilege of being invited to their fundraisers and have seen their passion on this topic. Anyone who has listened to James and his mum talk about Anthony would find it difficult to disagree with the real impact that BE FAST would have had in their situation.

As we have heard already, stroke is the leading cause of disability in Scotland, with thousands of individuals and families affected each year. Public health campaigns have proven effective in raising awareness and driving behavioural change, and I echo the thanks that others have given to Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland and the Stroke Association for their work.

To increase stroke awareness, we must invest in targeted campaigns that address specific barriers such as language, cultural differences or misinformation. Working with local authorities and third sector organisations on a local level can amplify their reach and impact. Figures provided by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland show that, each year, nearly 11,000 people in Scotland suffer a stroke, with around 136,000 people living with the on-going effects.

Stroke remains one of the leading causes of disability in our country, yet public awareness of its symptoms remains worryingly low. Research by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland shows that 39 per cent of adults in Scotland are unfamiliar with the FAST test, which is an essential tool for recognising stroke symptoms. Alarmingly, that figure rises to 53 per cent among younger adults aged 18 to 24. That is especially concerning because quick medical intervention is crucial, as it significantly reduces long-term damage and improves outcomes. That highlights why raising public awareness of stroke signs and the urgency of seeking immediate help must remain a priority.

The Scottish Government’s progressive stroke pathway and the UK-wide national clinical guideline for stroke emphasise the importance of campaigns such as FAST, which play a vital role in saving lives and improving health outcomes.

Campaigns such as FAST and BE FAST play a crucial role in raising awareness of symptoms. FAST focuses on face drooping, arm weakness, speech difficulties and the need for time to call emergency services, while BE FAST expands that to include balance issues and eyesight changes as additional warning signs.

Although BE FAST aims to capture a broader range of stroke symptoms, there is disagreement on the implementation of FAST versus BE FAST, with many people citing a lack of research on the efficacy of BE FAST and how using it might affect capacity in A and E departments. That is why I believe that further research and a further pilot scheme are needed to determine whether that expanded approach can improve overall outcomes. We can learn from the previous pilot, and I do not think that some of the issues that have been raised are entirely insurmountable, so they should be worked on. A consensus on the best way forward has to ensure that we maximise the impact on saving lives.

The Stroke Association has shared data that paints a stark picture of the challenges that Scotland faces in stroke care after people have had a stroke. In 2023, only one in seven eligible patients received a thrombectomy. Thrombectomy is 100 per cent cost effective and saves Scotland’s NHS £47,000 per patient. The Stroke Association’s report, “Scotland’s Stroke Improvement Plan—One year on. How’s it going?”, highlights key areas of concern arising from the Scottish stroke care audit. It shows that basic care delivery is falling short, with only 51 per cent of patients in 2023 receiving the stroke care bundle within the national standard, down from 64 per cent in 2019, and with NHS Forth Valley performing at a level of just 40.6 per cent. It also shows that we must invest in more psychological and rehabilitation support for stroke survivors, with all health boards currently falling into amber or red in delivery ratings and too many patients left without six-month recovery plan reviews.

In conclusion, we must ensure that investment in stroke care is improved. Better prevention, faster treatment and stronger recovery services will save lives, reduce costs and ensure better outcomes for patients and their families.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which states that I am a practising GP.

I thank my colleague Roz McCall for bringing the crucial issue of stroke awareness to the chamber. We have already heard that, each year, 11,000 people in Scotland suffer a stroke, with more than 136,000 people living with its lasting effects.

Stroke is a medical emergency, and recognising the signs early is essential. Stroke happens when blood flow to the brain is interrupted, which leads to a sudden loss of brain function. Quick action can make all the difference, helping people recover with less brain damage and reducing long-term disability.

As a doctor who worked at the hyperacute stroke unit in the Glasgow royal infirmary, I have seen at first hand how critical early recognition of stroke symptoms is, and how vital early treatment and rehabilitation is. In response to what Evelyn Tweed said, we saw only confirmed stroke cases and the people who came in the front door were reviewed by a clinician. It is essential that it is our job to do the evaluation and that we do not rely on patients’ googling abilities.

When people seek medical help immediately, their chances of recovery are much higher but, unfortunately, awareness of stroke symptoms remains worryingly low. According to recent research, 39 per cent of adults in Scotland do not know FAST. In younger adults, that figure rises to more than 50 per cent. That simply is not good enough, and we need to do more. A lack of public knowledge can lead to delayed help and devastating outcomes for individuals and families, and that is why raising awareness is essential.

Thanks to Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, we have the FAST campaign, which is Scotland’s first public stroke awareness initiative since the pandemic and I applaud it for that. The campaign promotes the FAST acronym to help people to recognise quickly the three most common stroke symptoms—facial drooping, arm weakness and slurred speech. The T stands for time, and it reminds us of the urgency of calling 999, as time is brain cells.

Although the FAST campaign has helped many people to recognise stroke symptoms and act quickly, it does not cover all possible indicators. Some people experience symptoms beyond the FAST guidelines, and their stroke goes undiagnosed. One example that we have already heard about today is Tony Bundy. Last year, Tony became seriously unwell while out shopping in Glasgow. His symptoms included balance issues, visual problems, cold sweats and vomiting. Obviously, none of those matched the FAST symptoms. Because of that, stroke was not diagnosed, and Tony went hours without receiving proper treatment. Tragically, he lost his life due to the undiagnosed stroke.

Since his passing, Tony’s son, Councillor James Bundy, has been advocating for expanding Scotland’s stroke guidelines to BE FAST, which would add balance and eyes as additional signs to watch for. We know about the danger of false negatives, where stroke goes undiagnosed because it does not match the FAST symptoms, and Councillor Bundy believes that BE FAST would lead to fewer false negatives. The Bundy family believes that, if BE FAST had been in place, Tony’s symptoms might have been recognised sooner, potentially saving his life. Some argue that BE FAST could lead to emergency services handling more non-stroke cases, but it potentially saves lives and spares families from heartbreak.

Roz McCall spoke about evidence. A meta-analysis of BE FAST shows that it has a higher diagnostic value, with a specificity of 0.85. If I might be indulged, BE FAST symptoms of balance and eyes are things that concentrate on the posterior circulation, and centres in the United States use BE FAST.

It is crucial that clinicians are aware of BE FAST, as it increases stroke awareness. As a general practitioner, I want people to come to me when they experience problems with their balance and eyes in an acute way, because that is my job. It is the job of a doctor to make the decision on whether somebody needs a CT scan.

Expanding BE FAST could help to save lives. Every moment in stroke counts, and, with increased awareness, we can ensure that more people get the help that they need.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am grateful for the privilege of speaking in the debate, to Roz McCall for bringing the motion and to Dr Sandesh Gulhane for the speech that he just made.

As many members will know, James Bundy works in my office, and I am delighted to welcome him and his mum, Selena, to the public gallery. I am going to give my voice to James—these are his words. He says:

“My family and I want to thank all MSPs who have given support to BE FAST and celebrate the fact that we have support from representatives from all parties elected in the 2021 elections.

I also want to express my family’s gratitude to Neil Gray and Jenni Minto for meeting us to discuss BE FAST, as well as members of the Stroke Association and Chest, Heart, and Stroke Scotland.

This gratitude, however, is mixed with growing frustrations. Ever since our first meetings with the Scottish Government and stroke charities, we have felt that not enough consideration has been given to the devastating consequences of ‘false negatives’.

My family and I feel like donkeys chasing a carrot. Initially, we were told BE FAST couldn’t be used in Scotland due to a lack of evidence of its effectiveness in live medical settings.

When we presented evidence from Australia showing successful trials, the excuse shifted to the lack of Scottish trials.

Yet, when we request a trial in Scotland, there’s apparently no appetite for it from Government or the stroke charities.

How can we gather Scottish evidence if those in charge refuse to trial BE FAST?

While my family understand concerns about ‘false positives’, we cannot view this issue through that lens alone.

The status quo is costing lives. People, like my Dad, are dying because strokes are not being diagnosed. Some stay at home, unsure they are having a stroke, while others are left in hospital corridors because a stroke is ruled out by medical professionals.

This is not good enough and cannot continue.

My Dad’s story is not unique. Running this campaign, I have spoken to people across Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom who have been let down by the restrictions of FAST.

Two family friends, informed about BE FAST through my family’s campaign, received vital care despite having no FAST symptoms.

One lost her balance and was diagnosed with a TIA at A&E, while another lost the ability to stand, and their eyes were struggling to focus. To the shock of her doctor at NHS Forth Valley, a TIA was confirmed.

No FAST symptoms, but they received the treatment that they needed because of BE FAST.

While I am proud of my family’s efforts to promote BE FAST, running a public health campaign isn’t our role—it’s the Scottish Government’s responsibility.

My Dad, Anthony James Bundy, was a great man taken from us far too soon. He missed my wedding last month, his 25th wedding anniversary with my mum, and many more, and the chance to see the business he launched months before his passing flourish.

These moments were stolen from him, and from my family, because of the limitations of FAST—limitations known to those responsible for stroke care in Scotland.

My Dad was a man who wanted to set things right. Learning this trait from him is probably the reason why I am working in politics.

Expanding FAST to BE FAST won’t bring my Dad back. It won’t make things right for my family. But what it will do is make things better for my fellow Scots by helping save countless lives across Scotland.”

Those were James’s words—these are mine. I know that the cabinet secretary is a good fellow, and I know that he has a good heart. So I ask him today, on behalf of this family—and countless other people in Scotland on the wrong end of the misdiagnoses that are occurring because of the lack of awareness of BE FAST—to launch a Scottish trial of BE FAST, so that we can assess its effectiveness in Scotland.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

First, I put on record my thanks to Roz McCall for bringing this debate to the chamber and for reminding us that stroke can affect any one of us. Like so many others who have contributed to the debate, I have a very close family experience of someone who had a stroke just this summer. Mercifully, they are making a pretty good recovery, but I recognise that for too many, including the Bundy family, that is not the case, and that stroke can lead to tragic and sudden loss.

I welcome the launch of Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland’s FAST campaign. It and other stroke charities, such as the Stroke Association, do vital work in raising awareness and supporting people who have suffered a stroke, and I want to thank them for that.

I say at the outset that I recognise and regret the fact that there has been no Government-backed stroke awareness campaign in Scotland for some time. Although our financial position remains difficult, my hope is that the Scottish Government can revisit whether a stroke awareness campaign next year will add value to the excellent work that is being carried out by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, as well as the work of the Stroke Association and other charities, which has been referenced by others from across the chamber.

It is clear that colleagues across the chamber recognise the importance of raising awareness of stroke. Roz McCall shared her personal story, for which I am very grateful; it is not easy to share in public stories about private issues. She made a strong point about the speed of response, which was also mentioned by others, and reinforced the need for greater awareness of FAST—face, arms, speech, time. I welcome her support regarding the importance of public awareness-raising campaigns and public health marketing campaigns.

Evelyn Tweed recognised some of the things that contribute to a greater risk of stroke. Interventions such as lifestyle changes that address issues such as blood pressure form a clear part of the reform and improvement work that I want our health service to do to prevent stroke. We have spoken clearly about the need for speed of reaction when stroke symptoms are present, but Evelyn Tweed’s point about the requirements for preventing stroke is also incredibly important.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

Does the cabinet secretary recognise that, for some people, stroke is not a preventable event and that they need timely support regardless of whether we can prevent all strokes?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I absolutely recognise that there are circumstances in which stroke is not preventable, but there are also contributing factors that make for a greater likelihood of stroke. From the public health perspective, we are seeking to make greater progress on those areas, but I recognise the point that Gillian Mackay made.

Carol Mochan gave a good example of the work that is taking place in Ayrshire and Arran. It was helpful to hear that. I am aware that the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health is due to visit thrombectomy services early in the new year. I agree with Carol Mochan about the interaction with health inequalities in this space. The point that I was making, and that Gillian Mackay responded to, is absolutely prevalent, and it is an issue that I am determined that we will do more to respond to.

Gillian Mackay was also correct about the mixed views on BE FAST, which Sandesh Gulhane also referenced.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

When the Stroke Association and Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland submitted information to the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, they asked for further evidence, and they needed further evidence. Surely that gives us the opportunity to get evidence and have a trial, which is what the motion suggests that we do.

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I am not closed to the campaign by the Bundy family and others, or to the points that have been raised by Alexander Stewart, Stephen Kerr and others. I will come back to that.

Sandesh Gulhane, who knows about the issue from his work in a clinical setting, was right about quick action making a huge difference, which is why I will turn to our actions shortly.

I am grateful to Stephen Kerr for giving voice to the Bundy family and to James Bundy, who is in the public gallery. I heard that voice clearly in the meeting that I attended, which was hosted by Alexander Stewart. The passion, compassion and determination of the family, which I recognised in a very emotional speech that Stephen Kerr gave, give us all pause for thought.

I turn to the actions that we are seeking to take as a result of some of the interventions that have come from the Bundy family. I met the Bundy family in April, along with Alexander Stewart and the Scottish Government’s specialty adviser for stroke. I was struck and moved by the family’s determination to ensure that no one else has to go through what they have experienced. Again, I offer them my very deepest condolences for their loss. It is clear from Stephen Kerr’s words, and the reflections that he shared with me in that meeting, how loved Mr Bundy was and how keenly his loss is still felt—I recognise that very much. For anyone who has lost close family members in sudden and tragic circumstances, that loss is felt even more keenly.

We all want people who may be having a stroke to be identified more quickly so that they can get the care that they need. That includes ensuring that healthcare staff are aware of less common stroke symptoms, and I will say more about what we are doing in that regard. We do not plan to replace FAST with BE FAST at this time. It is important that I clearly explain why, not least because of the powerful contributions from Alexander Stewart, Roz McCall, Stephen Kerr and others.

Our approach to stroke recognition must always be informed by the best clinical advice, and the clinical advice in this instance is that more evidence is needed before an expert decision can be made on stroke symptoms that are not currently included in FAST. That view is shared by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland and the Stroke Association. Importantly, that stance is aligned with the rest of the nations in the United Kingdom.

We do not plan to run trials of BE FAST in NHS boards. That is a decision for each board, but I keep that situation under review. I have asked the national advisory committee for stroke to keep the emerging evidence on stroke awareness screening under review and advise the Scottish Government if new evidence suggests that changes may be needed.

I turn to the action that we are taking now, which came directly after the meeting that I had with the Bundy family. After that meeting, I asked the specialty adviser for stroke to review the stroke awareness training for clinical staff, a point that was raised by Sandesh Gulhane and Evelyn Tweed. As a result, we are funding new training to help staff recognise stroke symptoms, which will be delivered by Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland. That includes recognising less recognisable symptoms, as was asked for by Evelyn Tweed in her contribution. The training will be available to general practices, emergency departments and the Scottish Ambulance Service.

Although we are focusing on FAST, that resource will also cover less common stroke symptoms such as blurred or double vision and loss of balance. The Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health has written to all NHS boards to ask them to encourage their staff to sign up when the training becomes available. We have also carried out polling to understand the current level of public awareness of the FAST symptoms. That will inform our future approach to awareness raising on stroke. Furthermore, recognising that tests such as FAST and BE FAST can never be 100 per cent accurate, we are also supporting the Scottish Ambulance Service to explore using video call technology to diagnose hyperacute strokes more accurately.

The Scottish Government recognises the importance of ensuring that less common stroke symptoms are not missed. The harrowing, tragic and traumatic case of the Bundy family is an example of that. We are taking action to improve education and support more accurate diagnosis, and we will continue to monitor the evidence base on stroke recognition to ensure that our approach is informed by the best available evidence.

I once again thank everybody for contributing to what has been a valuable and moving debate, and all those who have contributed to the campaign getting to this point. I am very grateful for that. The actions that are being taken by staff and campaigners are helping to save and change lives, and I am immensely grateful for everyone’s contribution.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is net zero and energy, and transport. Members who wish to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak buttons during the relevant question.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what engagement Transport Scotland has with regional transport partnerships, such as SWestrans, regarding contractual requirements for key local public transport services, including the provision of rural buses. (S6O-03989)

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

We recognise the importance of public transport for local communities and that ensuring the long-term sustainability of those vital local routes is a collaborative endeavour. Transport Scotland regularly engages with regional transport partnerships on transport matters, including challenges in, and opportunities to increase, the accessibility, availability and affordability of public transport. For example, Transport Scotland attended a meeting of RTP chairs in September to discuss the future of bus services in Scotland. SWestrans attended a related Transport Scotland-held workshop in October, along with other RTPs and stakeholders. However, Transport Scotland has not had any recent, specific engagement with SWestrans on its local bus service contract.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I have been contacted by many constituents who rely on the 500 bus service, which serves communities from Stranraer to Dumfries. Many people use the service to travel to hospital appointments, employment and social events. The journey can take in excess of three hours and there is no toilet on the bus. If there is a toilet, it is often locked, because the transport body, SWestrans, has never included a toilet in the contract. Does the minister agree that that is unacceptable? Could he suggest whether some kind of guidance could be created for regional transport partnerships to ensure that that situation is rectified and that it does not happen in other parts of Scotland?

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

I agree that the situation that Emma Harper has described does not seem to be providing an adequate, never mind a good, service for people. That is exactly the sort of issue that we need to resolve if we are to encourage more people to travel by bus. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport and I have made clear our expectations that Scotland’s transport providers and public services will continually improve their performance and people’s travel experiences. The adequate provision of toilets during journeys is, clearly, a fundamental part of that. I would be very happy to meet the member to discuss solutions to the situation in Dumfries and Galloway.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

The most recent report to SWestrans about the bus network said that it faced an existential threat. Services have been axed, passenger numbers have plummeted and fares have rocketed. Why does the Government keep cutting funding to SWestrans year after year in real terms, when more support is needed to prevent the bus network in Dumfries and Galloway from collapsing?

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

SWestrans, among other services, is funded through the network support grant. We will monitor the situation with SWestrans. I have already said that I will meet with Emma Harper, and we will take it from there.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The chamber has agreed that franchising can be a solution to the problems that have been described. Although the Scottish statutory instrument, the Local Services Franchises (Traffic Commissioner Notices and Panels) (Scotland) Regulations 2024, passed by the skin of its teeth, the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee raised serious concerns about the panel model. What discussions have taken place to address concerns that the process will be undemocratic, unnecessary and inappropriate?

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

The process is absolutely necessary. We have passed the SSI. The process started in 2019 and we have gone through the entire process. We are where we are.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on when it will publish its energy strategy and just transition plan. (S6O-03990)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

In the programme for government we committed to publishing the energy strategy and just transition plan shortly, in order to support Scotland’s just transition to a green economy. However, since we published a draft for consultation, there have been significant changes in global and United Kingdom energy markets, including UK-wide policy developments that are now being pursued by the UK Government, which will have a direct impact on Scotland’s energy sector. It is therefore important that we take time to consider those policies.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

From written questions, we know that £75 million of just transition funding has been allocated, but the Scottish Government does not hold figures relating to employment outcomes or job creation as a result of the funding. We also know that the net zero technology centre has no certainty of funding after the city region deal term ends in 2026.

Would the cabinet secretary accept that thousands of jobs in the north-east are being put at risk by the Government’s abject failure to have a proper plan in place?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

No, I would not accept that at all. I make it clear that we are fully committed to the just transition fund. A couple of months ago, I asked for an analysis of how the just transition fund has been deployed. That analysis relates very much to some of the things that Douglas Lumsden mentioned, such as how many jobs the fund has secured and how much it has increased capacity in the supply chain. I am considering that as we prepare to look at the next tranche of just transition funding, for which we will have a more focused approach to ensure that the funding that is available does the best things possible for a just transition in the north-east.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

I welcome the Government’s continued work on that. It is vital that we press ahead with Scotland’s energy transition, replicating the success of projects such as the Aventus Energy and Sumitomo developments.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that to build on the Scottish Government’s progress, the UK Government needs to urgently match our ambition for Scotland, and match the £500 million just transition fund?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

We are committed to driving forward Scotland’s energy transition and working with our UK Government counterparts where we need to do so. Our just transition fund has already allocated £75 million to date, supporting projects in communities across the north-east and Moray to create jobs and support innovation.

The fund sends a clear signal of support for the region, but we recognise that it needs to be part of a wider stream of investment from the UK Government and others to deliver a just transition to net zero across Scotland. I urge the UK Government to match the fund to help to ensure that net zero future.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I call Sarah Boyack—briefly, please.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

This week, we saw major investment in turbines in Hull. When are we going to get manufacturing transition in Scotland?

Does the cabinet secretary accept that the repeated delay to the energy strategy, never mind the length of the consenting process for projects such as Berwick Bank, means that we are missing out on supply-chain opportunities, and we are not getting the green jobs—

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Cabinet secretary.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

—because we are so far behind?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Cabinet secretary.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Ms Boyack will be aware that, through our inward investment programmes and Scottish Development International, Sumitomo is building a cable factory at Nigg.

We have also committed, in the onshore wind plan, to a remanufacturing site for turbine blades. That is just the start of the transition, and the start of the ScotWind licensing developments, so I expect that there will be much more of that to come.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

To ask the Scottish Government how it is engaging with the growing heat pump industry, in light of the potential role that heat pumps can play in helping to achieve net zero. (S6O-03991)

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

As well as the substantial funding that we provide for individuals and social landlords to install heat pumps, which is helping to grow supply chains, we are supporting business to develop the skills and accreditation that are needed in order to grow our qualified installer base.

Our green heat installer engagement programme, which is delivered by the Energy Saving Trust, provides assistance and support to help installers to participate fully and effectively in the clean heat supply chain. The enterprise agencies also work closely with manufacturers and installers to support their growth in Scotland.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Aira, a Swedish heat pump specialist, recently opened a hub in Stirling and is set to become a big employer in my constituency. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that opportunities are available for engineers to reskill in order to work in that growing industry?

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

I welcome the opening of Aira’s Scottish hub. Supporting Scotland’s current and future workforce to develop the skills that are needed for the net zero transition is a priority for this Government. Many of Scotland’s colleges and independent training providers offer heat pump training. We have invested in a mobile training centre for heat pump installation to ensure that training is equally available across all geographic areas.

As well as the green heat installer engagement programme that I mentioned, we are funding the clean heat strategic workforce development fund, which is delivered by Scottish Enterprise.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The Acting Minister for Climate Action must be living on a different planet, because Aira—that very company in Stirling—has condemned the Scottish Government’s programme. Aira says that it has to fill in a 38-page application form, that it takes 50 days to get an answer, and that it is two months before the company gets its money. Aira says that the Government’s funding scheme is the biggest blockage to making such progress happen.

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

The Government is committed to working with that company and other companies. On skills, the Scottish Government is continuing to work in partnership with that company and other companies to ensure that there are opportunities for individuals to reskill or to find the skills that they need. We are working closely with colleges and apprentices to achieve that. We are very happy to work with companies that have any suggestions as to how the process may be changed in the future.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its position regarding investment in the future of Scotland’s nuclear industry. (S6O-03992)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The Scottish Government does not support the building of new nuclear power stations in Scotland under current technologies. We recognise the significant value that Torness and its workforce has contributed to Scotland’s economy over many decades and we support extending the operating lifespan of Scotland’s last remaining nuclear power station if strict environmental and safety criteria continue to be met.

Decommissioning Scotland’s nuclear sites will also take decades and will require the retention of a highly skilled workforce. National planning framework 4 supports the redevelopment of the Hunterston and Chapelcross sites and notes the opportunities to repurpose existing assets to create greener jobs.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I think that the minister should keep up with Brussels, because the European Council agreed months ago that nuclear power is a strategic technology for EU decarbonisation. She needs to read the EU renewable energy directive. It is astonishing that the SNP keeps peddling this blatant anti-science misinformation. What assessment has the minister made of how much carbon could be removed from our energy production if we used nuclear energy?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I have stated my Government’s view on nuclear energy. Regardless of what has been said in the EU, lots of EU member states are ceasing to use nuclear energy and want to phase it out. I give the example of Germany. I also point Stephen Kerr to the words of some academics from across the United Kingdom, France and Japan—Professor Steve Thomas, Dr Paul Dorfman, Professor MV Ramana and Professor Amory Lovins—who said in a statement that,

“After more than 60 years of commercial history, nuclear is getting further from, not nearer to, being able to survive without massive public subsidies.”

They also said that, constructing new plants takes considerably longer than renewable equivalents, according to the UK Government’s regulated asset-based model. Scotland is rich in renewable resources that will be able to be deployed far more quickly than any new nuclear plants.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

Earlier this year, EDF Energy reported that, in the worst case scenario, Hinkley Point C could cost £47.9 billion to complete, compared to the 2016 estimate of £18 billion. Does the cabinet secretary agree, given that the public finances are so constricted by the Tories’ £22 billion black hole legacy, that we would be better placed to focus on Scotland’s natural abundance in the form of renewable power development, which is cheap and quicker to build?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I absolutely agree with that point, which Gordon MacDonald makes very well. It takes 17 years to put a new nuclear plant in place, and he has mentioned the cost that is associated with such developments. We cannot afford to waste time and money on that approach. While renewables have become cheaper in recent decades, new nuclear plants have only become costlier. In Scotland, we are lucky enough to have abundant natural resources and a highly skilled workforce that enables us to take advantage of those opportunities. Significant growth in renewables, hydrogen and carbon storage and capture provide the best pathway to net zero by 2045.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding mitigating fire risk from battery energy storage systems, in light of the role that battery storage can play in the future energy mix of Scotland. (S6O-03993)

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

The Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy regularly discusses with ministerial colleagues a range of issues relating to Scotland’s future energy mix, including engaging on the safety and regulatory processes around battery energy storage sites.

When new development proposals come forward, our fourth national planning framework ensures that the impacts of proposals on communities and nature, including cumulative impacts, are important considerations in the decision-making process. All applications are subject to site-specific assessments. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service continually reviews and develops its operational response to any new and emerging technology to keep communities safe and to ensure the highest level of preparedness.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Residents and community councils are voicing their concerns over plans for battery energy storage systems, due to emergency crews not having the right equipment to deal with potential fires. I recently met a developer regarding that matter and I have raised issues over fire safety. A lot of those developments are in close proximity to residential areas, leaving many communities, including those in my region, very concerned.

To reassure residents and communities, there needs to be clear guidance on fire safety to improve the policy and procedures of battery energy storage systems. The guidance is dated, so will the minister commit to looking at existing legislation and guidance to improve fire safety standards for those particular types of energy storage development?

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

The Government listens closely to all stakeholders—not least the Fire and Rescue Service, as I mentioned—on that matter. All applications are subject to site-specific assessments. The cumulative impacts that I mentioned are relevant, because the cumulative impact of energy development proposals must also be considered through statutory environmental impact assessment processes.

In short, I take seriously the issues that the member has raised. The Government makes sure that communities are engaged at an early stage and can meaningfully influence all such proposals.

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

Expanding energy storage comes hand in hand with increasing renewable energy technology, and both will play a vital role in Scotland’s future energy mix. Will the minister say more about how the safety of those developments is assessed and planned so that we can deliver a secure net zero future for our communities?

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

As I mentioned, all applications are subject to those assessments, and the impacts of energy development proposals also require to be considered closely. That includes statutory elements around environmental impact assessment processes.

Scottish ministers have an expectation that communities are involved in the process and are listened to. Where there is a need for co-ordination among applicants who are proposing developments in the same area, all parties are expected to work together to co-ordinate the development and minimise any impacts on the communities and the environment.

When determining applications under the Electricity Act 1989, Scottish ministers are required to seek advice from planning authorities to ensure that decision making is co-ordinated in that way.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Question 6 has been withdrawn.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To as the Scottish Government how much the individual bus fare concessionary schemes have cost in 2024. (S6O-03995)

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

Presiding Officer, with your permission, I would like to correct my earlier response to Colin Smyth. It is the bus operators in the south-west that are funded by the network support grant. SWestrans funding is dealt with separately and will be addressed in the budget.

To answer Edward Mountain’s question, the total cost of the national concessionary travel schemes for the period 1 January 2024 to 13 October 2024 equated to £154.6 million for the older and disabled persons scheme, and £140.1 million for the young persons free bus travel scheme. It should be noted that costs incurred beyond 13 October 2024 are not yet finalised and, as such, have not been included.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Last year, £165 million was spent on giving under-22-year-olds unlimited bus travel. No such scheme is available to islanders who are under 22. They are allowed just two trips, and they use their ferries like we use our buses. Will the Government introduce a scheme for islanders who are under 22, so that they have parity with those on the mainland?

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

Mr Mountain is talking about the ferry concession. The islands connectivity plan will address that issue.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

One of the less obvious groups that benefit from free bus travel in Scotland is disabled folk. Where they need support, free travel is also available for their companion or carer. How many disabled people and their companions or carers have enjoyed free bus travel in the past year, thanks to the Scottish National Party Government?

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

I very much welcome the opportunity to—[ Interruption .] Pardon?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Continue, minister.

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

I very much welcome the opportunity to highlight how the SNP Government’s investment in concessionary travel is benefiting people who otherwise might not be able to afford to get around their community and Scotland.

In the 12 months to 31 October 2024, 24,068,991 journeys were made by people who have a national entitlement card because of disability or sight impairment, which also permits a companion to travel for free; that figure includes companions who accompanied the cardholder. A further 7,112,004 journeys were made by people with a card that provides the individual with free bus travel. As of 1 November 2024, 129,324 disabled or sight-impaired cardholders can have a companion travel with them for free, and a further 40,866 cardholders have access to free bus travel.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is, regarding any implications for its energy strategy and just transition plan, to the reported announcement by Apache that it will cease all operations in the North Sea by the end of 2029. (S6O-03996)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

We are aware of reports of that disappointing commercial decision by Apache. As we finalise the energy strategy and just transition plan, we are committed to working in partnership with industry to deliver a just transition for Scotland’s valued oil and gas sector that recognises the declining nature of the North Sea basin but is also in line with our climate commitments.

As part of that, we continue to call on the United Kingdom Government, which holds key levers around the fiscal and regulatory regimes, to listen very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by business on risks to jobs and investment in that transition.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Many North Sea firms now feel existentially threatened by the damaging anti-industry narratives of both Scotland’s Governments. Scottish ministers promised us an energy strategy in spring 2022 and then summer 2024, yet we still have no date for publication. Will the minister give us a clear publication date for the strategy, and will she promise industry that the demonising mantra of “presumption against” will not feature in it?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

In my view, as long as there is demand for fossil fuels in the United Kingdom, we should be meeting as much as possible of that demand from our domestic supply in the North Sea. It is up to us to reduce our demand.

It is notable that Apache singled out the energy profits levy—EPL—as a reason for its departure. That is a UK policy that was brought in by the former Conservative Government.

As far as I am concerned, we have to make sure that our energy strategy and just transition plan are as robust as possible. We are committed to publishing them as soon as we can. However, as Liam Kerr will know, there is a discussion to be had with the UK Government, which intends to consult on future approaches to new licensing for oil and gas, potentially refining the position. We want to play our part in that discussion. We believe that we have a nuanced and sensible approach, which looks at licensing on a case-by-case basis, includes robust climate compatibility assessment and considers energy security.

We have shown our commitment to the industry by assisting it in reducing its production emissions through the innovation and targeted oil and gas—INTOG—round of licensing for floating offshore wind.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

The UK Government’s energy plans are causing an energy exodus from the north-east. Labour’s flagship project GB energy will now receive only £100 million of funding over its first two years—that is nothing like the £8 billion that was pledged.

Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on what engagement it has had with the UK Government on the concerns that businesses are expressing about risks to jobs and investment in the transition because of the changes to the energy profits levy and the allowances regime?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Scottish ministers engaged with UK counterparts on a number of matters in the run-up to the autumn budget. For example, the Acting Minister for Climate Action, who is sitting beside me, met the under-secretary of state for energy in Aberdeen on 17 September. We continue to urge the UK Government to listen carefully to businesses on the ground about the impacts of the EPL on jobs and investment during the transition.

The UK Government also needs to work with industry to set out a stable, long-term fiscal regime to give the sector the much-needed certainty and stability that it deserves.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes portfolio questions on net zero and energy, and transport. There will be a brief pause to allow a change of members on the front benches before we move on to the next item of business.

National Care Service

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Maree Todd, the Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport, on the national care service. The minister will take questions at the end of the statement, therefore there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call the minister for up to 10 minutes.

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

Strong social care and community health support are the bedrock of a thriving and compassionate civil society. Most of us will need the social care system at some point in our lives, for ourselves or for the people whom we love. I am extremely grateful for the efforts that hundreds of thousands of paid and unpaid carers, as well as our dedicated workforce, make every day to support those people who are accessing social care.

I want to talk about why reform of social care is necessary, what the Government is already doing to drive improvement, why a national care service is essential to achieve the change that people want and need, and why I have asked for stage 2 of the bill to be paused.

There cannot be one person in the chamber today who does not already understand that the social care system needs fundamental reform. The starting point for our work on the national care service was the independent review of adult social care. The social care system was acutely impacted by the Covid pandemic and that review, which Derek Feeley led, brought home the importance of the consistent delivery of high-quality care, with compassion and kindness.

It reminded us that care is not something that is needed only at the end of our lives and it reinforced the need to ensure that those who deliver care are also looked after, and that no one is left behind or falls through the cracks of the system. The recommendations of the Feeley review were unequivocal about the need for change. The Government accepted the recommendations in full and we remain committed to delivering on them.

I have personally met hundreds of people across Scotland who use social care and community health services, as well as people with caring responsibilities. My officials have met thousands more. I am grateful to all those people for sharing their time and their views. Although people have a wide range of needs and access many kinds of support, they have consistently and clearly told us that things need to change.

I want to restate for the chamber three of the key issues that people have told us require urgent action. Those are the reasons why change is so necessary. Those issues are valuing social care; access to consistent, high-quality services; and oversight of planning and delivery.

The first issue is shifting society’s attitudes to ensure that social care is fully valued. We must value the people who access care, and the impact that our carers and workforce have on people’s wellbeing and independence. We reopened the independent living fund in April to enable up to 1,000 of the most disabled people to access the support that they need to lead independent lives.

For carers, we introduced the Carers (Scotland) Act 2016 to enhance and extend the rights of all adult and young carers across the country, and we are investing £88.4 million per year to support implementation. We published our national carers strategy in December 2022, which sets out how we will support and recognise our carers and includes our plan to strengthen access to short breaks for carers. Following our expansion of easy-access voluntary sector short breaks support by £5 million in 2022-23, we have maintained a budget of £8 million for 2023-24 and 2024-25.

For people who work in the adult social care sector, we are making good progress on a way to introduce sectoral bargaining for the sector, in line with the recommendations of the Fair Work Convention. We are engaging constructively and meaningfully with the United Kingdom Government around the Employment Rights Bill, but we need it to ensure that social care is not disadvantaged by the national insurance increase.

This year, we invested £230 million for social care workers who deliver direct care in commissioned services to have their pay increased to at least the £12 per hour real living wage rate. We are also committed in the programme for government to prioritise funding to local government to maintain the real living wage in 2025-26.

The second issue is access to consistent, high-quality support and services that are targeted where and when they are most needed, with clear information about what services are available. There is unacceptable variation in that across local authority areas. For example, in some areas of Scotland, delayed discharge is ten times worse than in others, which is clearly unfair.

We remain committed to a human rights-based approach to social care in Scotland. Self-directed support means that care should be arranged and delivered subject to individuals’ choice and control. I am grateful to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee for the work that it has recently undertaken on post-legislative scrutiny of SDS, and I am actively considering where further improvements can be made.

The third issue is oversight of planning and delivery. There are several aspects to that, and it is the area in which we have the furthest to go to reassure people with lived experience that we have heard them and are acting on their concerns.

We need greater transparency. Collectively, we spend £5.75 billion on social care services, and we have increased investment in social care by £1 billion in the course of this parliamentary session. However, we have not seen the improvements that we would expect, and there is little national oversight of where the money goes. Greater scrutiny of how services are planned, funded and provided is urgently needed; indeed, the Parliament has said so itself in its post-legislative scrutiny of the Social Care (Self-directed Support) (Scotland) Act 2013.

There must be meaningful inclusion of people with lived experience in the governance, planning and scrutiny of social care. That will require formal structures to enable participation. We must be able to identify and share good practice and to challenge and resolve issues whenever they arise.

One specific example of work to drive that kind of improvement is the collaborative response and assurance group—CRAG—which is co-chaired by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. It provides targeted support to local systems to reduce the number of people in delayed discharge. Significant work is occurring to ensure that discharge without delay policies, procedures and practice are patient-centred and enable people to recover in the right place and at the right time.

People have told us that the Government should be held accountable for the social care system in Scotland, and they have called on ministers to lead that much-needed change. The work that I have set out is evidence that I am already doing that. The National Care Service (Scotland) Bill is intended to support improvement, with structural reform that will further empower the scrutiny role of people with lived experience. The bill and the package of draft stage 2 amendments that I shared with the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee in June represent the Government’s view on how best to achieve that structural reform.

We have encountered some opposition to our proposals. I was particularly disappointed that, after more than a year of negotiations, COSLA withdrew its support for the NCS bill. Disabled people’s organisations across Scotland have reported being ignored by COSLA, despite their attempts to engage. I need to consider what approach will secure sufficient support to progress.

Throughout the development of the bill, the Scottish Government has been committed to listening and engaging. Operating as a minority government makes that even more important. For that reason, last week, I wrote to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee to say that I wanted to take the time needed to fully reflect in our approach to the bill the range of views that have been expressed, and that I was not seeking to start stage 2 of the NCS bill on 26 November. That was a necessary step to ensure that we get this right for people.

There are many areas on which we agree, and I appeal to all members across the chamber to come together to deliver the change that people tell us time and again is needed. That is what the people whom we are here to serve need. Only yesterday, a collective group of disabled people’s organisations—the disabled people’s movement—published an open letter. It reads:

“we need a National Care Service and fundamental reforms to the broken systems. Disabled people of all ages need change, and the status quo is not an option because disabled people are suffering. We need vital support to live a life of dignity and choices that non-disabled people take for granted.”

We owe it to them to now come together, to agree the way forward and to deliver for the people who need it most—the people who use social care and community health services and those with caring responsibilities. We all know that the status quo is not an option. Change is needed, and we must all work to secure improvement.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

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

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I declare an interest as a practising national health service general practitioner.

Four years in the making wasted, £30 million wasted and countless hours of stakeholder time wasted. It is clear from listening to the minister’s statement that she believes that the Scottish Government is correct and absolutely everyone else is wrong. The minister is trying to shift the blame to COSLA and all Opposition parties, but what she has not said is that COSLA withdrew its support after painstaking negotiations, because all its key asks had been ignored. The minister has united civic Scotland and the Parliament against the bill.

Minister, you are delaying the inevitable, as the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill is dead in the water, and it is clear that it is now the greatest barrier to social care reform in Scotland. I have three short questions. When did the minister know that the current iteration of the bill could not go forward? Subsequently, when did the minister inform the Cabinet? Minister, do you accept responsibility for your own bill?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Through the chair, please.

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

Much of what Sandesh Gulhane has said is completely incorrect. We are a listening Government. We changed the bill so extensively, much to the concern of many in this Parliament, because we listened and because COSLA, in particular—our local authority colleagues—asked us to change the bill. More than a year ago, we made an agreement to have tripartite, shared accountability between local authorities, the NHS and us. Over the course of the following year, we put in place a system and a proposal that we thought would work.

It is no wonder that I was taken by surprise by COSLA’s withdrawal of its support. It had asked us to pause negotiations over the course of the summer, because it had capacity issues in relation to being able to turn its attention to the delayed discharge problem and to focus on negotiations about the bill. So, we set the bill to one side and, without coming back to the negotiating table, COSLA unilaterally withdrew its support.

I am not seeking to blame COSLA. I am trying to say that there is a very strong case for change. In the foreword to his review of adult social care, Derek Feeley said:

“In the improvement world, there is a maxim which reads something like ‘every system is perfectly designed to get the results it gets’. That is the basic challenge for us. We have inherited a system that gets unwarranted local variation, crisis intervention, a focus on inputs, a reliance on the market, and an undervalued workforce. If we want a different set of results, we need a different system.”

Now—

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Very briefly, minister.

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

I heard from COSLA at the end of September, the Cabinet was informed immediately and I have been working hard ever since to resolve the situation. [ Interruption .]

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I am going to need slightly briefer responses. I am also going to need front-bench members not to hector the minister as she tries to respond.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I agree with the minister that the status quo is not an option, but the Scottish National Party has had 17 years to fix social care. In fact, it has had more than three years to get the bill right and has simply failed to do so.

Scottish Labour first called for a national care service 13 years ago, but what has been brought forward by this Government simply does not come close. Contrary to the minister’s assertions, the bill does not deliver on the Feeley recommendations. The Government simply has not listened. It has wasted £30 million, and it has let down disabled people in the process. People’s care packages are being cut right now, delayed discharges are at a record high now and staff are leaving in their droves.

I ask the minister how long the process will now take. The Scottish Government could use alternative legislation to do many of the things that we agree on far more quickly than it could through this bill. Anne’s law can be done with secondary legislation, as can carers’ respite, procurement, ethical commissioning, fair pay and collective bargaining and the national social work agency does not need legislation at all.

Will the minister stop the dither and delay and tell members what she will do to improve social care right now?

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

Each time Jackie Baillie speaks about the national care service, she reiterates her personal commitment to having such a service. We are well aware that, in England, Labour is introducing a national care service and, in Wales, Labour is introducing a national care service, but here, Scottish Labour opposes the introduction of a national care service, much to the dismay of disabled people’s organisations.

I will quote Tressa Burke from the Glasgow Disability Alliance, who said:

“Our voices, priorities and needs have been drowned in this political backbiting where the very people who are meant to be at the very heart have been forgotten ... We would much rather have made amendments and made sure that the changes were being made as we go.”

That is what disabled people’s organisations are telling me and that is what they are saying in public.

I intend to return in the new year with a proposal for the bill, which I will take to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee.

Jackie Baillie continues heckling me from a sedentary position. She has a small window of opportunity in which to come forward and show disabled people her commitment to a national care service in Scotland.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I remind everyone that we need briefer questions and shorter answers.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Social care users across the country are, ultimately, at the heart of this discussion and they require our support and reassurance in light of the delay to the bill. Will the minister outline how the Scottish Government will engage directly with care users about the next steps in the process and how those care users will be supported in the meantime?

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

As I said, I have personally met hundreds of people across Scotland who use social care or community health services or who have caring responsibilities, and my officials have met thousands more. I absolutely reassure them all that, by working in partnership with them, we are committed to reforming the social care system in Scotland.

We are building and co-designing the detail, through continued engagement with people who have experience of using those services. We regularly meet partners and stakeholders, who are the experts in delivering social care services, to develop the final scope of a national care service that delivers for everyone.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Traditionally, when one is in a hole, one stops digging. When the Scottish Government is in a hole, it announces a review and continues digging, looking in vain for a face-saving exit. This is rapidly becoming the legislative equivalent of the Monty Python dead parrot sketch. As far as everyone but the Scottish Government is concerned, it is an ex-bill.

Will the minister please now accept that the proposals are not an answer that the social care sector can work with and will she engage with colleagues from across the chamber to deliver a much-needed solution for the sector?

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

I again reiterate that I am engaging right across the board with all stakeholders. The voices that are not being heard in the debate are those of the disabled people’s organisations that made clear that they want to see a national care service. Derek Feeley already gave us a review with clear recommendations about what we need to deliver in Scotland. I am more than happy to meet members from across the chamber to hear their ideas about how we can proceed and can deliver on that review.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Like so many of the folks in disabled people’s organisations and people with lived experience throughout the country, I am very disappointed that there has been a delay. There are certain things that we must progress with, though, and I want some reassurance from the minister. Anne’s law, which I put into guidance, needs to go into legislation to fulfil promises that were made to Anne Duke’s husband, Campbell Duke, her family and the care home relatives Scotland group. Can the minister assure me that Anne’s law will go into legislation? If she can explain how that is to be done, I would be very grateful.