Scottish Parliament, 28 November 2024

328 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to general question time. I would be grateful for concise questions and responses so that we can include as many members as possible.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

To ask the Scottish Government what correspondence it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding its proposed reforms to electricity infrastructure consenting in Scotland. (S6O-04029)

I note my entry in the register of members’ interests in respect of current and proposed pylon wayleaves.

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

In November 2023, the previous Conservative-led UK Government agreed to review Scottish consenting in its transmission acceleration action plan, as a response to recommendations from the UK Electricity Networks Commissioner, Nick Winser. Our officials have been working closely with UK Government counterparts on that work since February 2024, albeit with a pause during the election period, to impart a better understanding of the issues that are faced by all relevant stakeholders in Scotland, from developers to communities. During that period, the two Governments have exchanged formal correspondence to acknowledge the on-going work and established clear expectations. Engagement is now progressing in collaboration with the new UK Government.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

Constituents have complained that the consultation is not user friendly, with the bulk of the questions directed towards business. The period in which to make submissions was only one month and the consultation closes tomorrow. Many of my constituents believe that the Government has deliberately made it difficult in order to reduce the number of submissions from people whose communities will be destroyed by the projects. Will the minister confirm whether he has any influence to extend the submission period?

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

I am not quite sure whether Alexander Burnett fully appreciates that the Electricity Act 1989 is reserved, UK Government legislation and that changes to the relevant clauses will ultimately be made by the UK Government. Nonetheless, the Scottish Government has been working closely with our UK counterparts and has co-designed the consultation. I am satisfied that many organisations and communities are taking part in it, but I remind Alexander Burnett of the role of the UK Government in it, too.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

The independent Climate Change Committee has forecast that, for the Scottish and UK Governments to meet net zero targets, electricity supply must be doubled to meet demand, which would mean a significant increase in electricity infrastructure projects across the country. Will the minister advise how we can, on the one hand, work with local communities and protect our natural environment, while, on the other, being a key enabler of decarbonisation and green economic growth?

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

Rona Mackay points to our twin aims of ensuring that we have a fair process and ensuring that we decarbonise the country. I am satisfied that we are seeking to achieve both those aims. In collaboration with officials and ministers at the UK Government end, we are seeking to ensure not only that we make new projects easier to develop but that we make the process fairer and simpler and, indeed, that we update it in the way that the process has already been updated in England.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that students with additional support needs receive adequate resources and tailored educational support. (S6O-04030)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that all students with a disability, a long-term medical condition or additional support needs are supported as they study in further and higher education.

The Equality Act 2010 places a specific duty on colleges and universities to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that disabled students can access education and any related services. We have also opened up living cost support to disabled students who are studying full-time distance learning courses, who are unable to study campus-based courses because of their disability.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

What progress has been made in relation to colleges and universities that builds on the measures that are currently in place to support students with additional support needs?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

In 2023-24, the number of full-time higher education students with disabilities or additional support needs who were supported by disabled students allowance increased to 5,855, which represented a 5.4 per cent increase over the year. The support comes to a total of £14.1 million, which is an increase of 18.4 per cent over the year.

The data also shows that we now have a record number of new students at university with a recorded disability or an additional support need. In Scotland’s colleges, a record level of learning hours was delivered to learners with a declared disability. That represented an increase of two percentage points over the year.

Colleges and universities continue to offer a range of support directly to students with additional support needs, by implementing reasonable adjustments and providing support with exams and assessments. Of course, we and they aspire to do more.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The last time the Government consulted on a review of support for disabled students was in 2019, and since then the landscape has changed. One of the recommendations of that review was that a forum should be established to look at disability-related issues in further and higher education. Is the minister considering setting up such a forum? Will he meet me to discuss that proposal?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

As the member is aware, we are committed to looking at a range of issues around student support for not only disabled students but all students.

With regard to her point about a forum, I am more than happy to meet her to discuss the issue. It is a reasonable point to make. However, I would be keen to extend the remit of any such forum, if possible, so that it could look at apprenticeships as well.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what is being done to address the reported shortage of forensic pathologists across Scotland. (S6O-04031)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

There are 14 forensic pathologists in Scotland covering the services required by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in its deaths investigations, and the Crown Office confirms that there have been no significant delays to post-mortems that require a forensic specialist.

There are currently four forensic pathology training posts in Scotland, and the Crown Office is engaged in supporting the Royal College of Pathologists training programmes.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I am surprised that the Lord Advocate, who is responsible for the service, is not here to answer the question.

I believe that there are now no forensic pathologists employed in the north-east, which means that agency pathologists are flown into the city of Aberdeen for a day’s work. That results in huge costs and long delays for families who are looking for answers. I have also heard of bodies being transferred to other parts of Scotland without the families’ knowledge.

How has the Scottish Government allowed this crisis in forensic pathology to happen? What will be done to tackle the inadequate training provision, to train and retain people in Scotland?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I understand the serious issues that Douglas Lumsden narrates. Pathology services in the north of Scotland were previously provided by the University of Aberdeen. However, NHS Grampian has now taken over the provision of toxicology and histopathology services in that area, and the health board is also working to establish a forensic pathology service.

In the meantime, appropriate forensic pathology coverage is being delivered by locums and other service providers in Scotland. I also point Mr Lumsden to what I said in my earlier answer about the training places that are available. If he requires any further detail, I would be happy to provide that in writing or in a further discussion in a meeting.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to the nightclub industry, in light of the Night Time Industries Association’s launch of the last night out campaign. (S6O-04032)

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

A vibrant, high-value and quality night-time sector is important to our economy. We will continue doing all that we can to support businesses to thrive. We are already freezing the basic property rate in 2024-25 and providing a package of reliefs worth an estimated £685 million, including the small business bonus scheme. That scheme is the most generous relief of its kind in the United Kingdom and we estimate around half of properties in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors are eligible for 100 per cent relief in 2024-25.

The Deputy First Minister met the Night Time Industries Association on 15 November to discuss the current challenges and solutions, and that engagement will continue.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

More than three UK clubs close every week and there is a danger that all UK nightclubs will close by the end of the decade. During the summer, I met business owner Donald MacLeod at one of my old haunts, the Cathouse rock club, and we spoke about the lack of support that businesses receive to allow our night-time economy to thrive. We mentioned low-emission zones, the lack of public transport, the lack of rates relief for businesses and the decline of towns, high streets and city centres.

The night-time industry is being dismantled brick by brick, so the Government should back the last night out campaign to help support significant nightclubs, such as the Catty. Will the minister save the rave?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I commend the member on her excellent taste in nightclubs. I too frequented the Cathouse, and Voodoo before that, when I was younger and had hair as long as the member’s. I very much appreciate the sincerity of the points that she makes and I know her personal commitment to the issue as convener of the cross-party group on town centres.

The Government is committed to working constructively with the night-time industry and across hospitality and leisure. Using a range of interventions to support our town and city centres is a priority for the Government, and regulatory and fiscal measures will be set out as part of our tax policy in the budget next week. I am committed to engaging with businesses and would be more than happy to meet the member, or with any other member who wants to work constructively to ensure that our night-time industries are supported.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its policies and collaboration with local authorities to ensure that support is provided to pupils who cannot attend school for medical reasons. (S6O-04033)

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

When illness leads to children and young people being absent from school for a prolonged period, section 40 of the Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc Act 2000 places a statutory duty on education authorities to make special arrangements for pupils to receive their education elsewhere, such as at home or in hospital.

We have published guidance for local authorities that provides advice on their roles and responsibilities and those of hospitals and other services regarding children who are unable to attend school due to ill health.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for that update.

I have been contacted by families in East Kilbride who are concerned about the lasting impact of Covid, particularly around mental health, on children and young people, some of whom have not been able to attend school regularly.

What consideration has been given to sharing best practice across the country on integrating pupils back into school after absence due to ill health? What work is under way to support parents, guardians and teachers to put mixed-model learning into action where that would be appropriate in ensuring that young people can achieve their full potential?

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

The member raises an important issue. She will be aware that additional Government support was provided to local authorities during the pandemic to help young people make the transition back to formal education. The on-going effects of the pandemic remain acute in some schools.

We are considering a review and update of the guidance that I alluded to in my original answer. The member also spoke about the hugely important role of parents. We are already rolling out a new approach to support for parents across the country, and I will take the issue that she raises back to officials in order to consider what more we might be able to do on the specific issues of Covid and how to facilitate post-pandemic support.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the cross border connection proposals for the Scottish Borders. (S6O-04034)

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

The regulation of electricity networks is reserved to the United Kingdom Government. Scottish ministers have devolved responsibility for determining applications for consent under the Electricity Act 1989. Given that, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on individual infrastructure projects that may come forward as I may not interfere with or prejudice any decisions that may come before the Scottish ministers for determination.

In general, however, the Scottish Government recognises that the expansion of the electricity grid will play a crucial role in delivering on our energy ambitions and maximising the economic opportunities of Scotland’s abundant renewable resources.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Borders residents are inundated with energy developments, and communities now face more than 75km of pylons stretching right through the Scottish Borders. In the coming weeks, I will chair a virtual village hall meeting to give locals a chance to voice their legitimate concerns directly to Scottish Power. Will the Scottish Government stand with residents and ensure that no plans proceed against the will of local communities in the Scottish Borders?

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

The national planning framework makes it clear that potential impacts on communities—the member alluded to them, although, as I said, I cannot comment on the specific case—and on nature and heritage, including the cumulative effects of developments, are important considerations in the decision-making process. She will forgive me: if I read the question correctly and there was an invitation in it, the ministerial code prevents me from commenting. However, I thank her for her question.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government what consultations it has held with businesses in advance of its 2025-26 budget. (S6O-04035)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The Scottish Government has had a wide range of engagement at ministerial and official levels to inform budget choices across all portfolios. That has included engaging with a number of business representative organisations and sector bodies, and consideration of written representations that have been received.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

The Scottish National Party Government does not understand business. That is not my view, but the view of businesses across Scotland that feel the damage that has been caused by years of SNP tax rises and anti-business regulations. If we want the Scottish economy to grow, we have to support our businesses in that endeavour. My party wants to reverse the tide of rising taxes, starting with a fully costed plan to give pubs and restaurant businesses across Scotland full rates relief for one year. Will the cabinet secretary finally listen and do something positive for business in Scotland?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I do not accept Jeremy Balfour’s characterisation of that at all, because a number of measures in the current budget already benefit businesses and properties in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, including the freeze of the basic property rate and the most generous small business bonus relief in the United Kingdom. We estimate that around half of properties in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors will be eligible for 100 per cent relief in 2024-25. Decisions on non-domestic rates and reliefs for the 2025-26 budget will be considered in the context of the budget announcement next Wednesday.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the potential impact on Scotland’s finances, how much it estimates will be raised in increased taxes in Scotland in 2025-26 as a result of the UK autumn budget. (S6O-04036)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Scotland faces more than £2 billion in higher taxes next year as a result of the UK Government’s autumn budget, which is largely driven by higher employer national insurance contributions. The impact of the employer national insurance contribution increases in Scotland is estimated to be around £750 million for the public sector and the wider sectors that are contracted to provide and support public services, such as general practitioners, social care providers and early learning and childcare providers. The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations estimates that the third sector faces costs of around £75 million. The remainder of the employer national insurance contributions increase will be borne by businesses across Scotland and will pose a serious challenge to many organisations and businesses.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Before we move to Mr Kidd’s supplementary question, I note that a number of conversations are going on across the chamber. I would be grateful if those could end.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

As the cabinet secretary said, a significant proportion of the higher taxes that we are talking about come down to Labour’s decision to increase national insurance contributions. It is of deep concern that the UK Government now appears to be briefing that it will not cover the full cost of the national insurance increase to Scotland’s public sector, which could cost our public services hundreds of millions of pounds and who knows how many jobs. Can the cabinet secretary provide any update regarding what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the impact that that short-sighted Labour decision could have on our public services?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

If the amounts that were reported this week are all that is provided, that will mean that the chancellor will short-change services that the public depend on by more than £400 million. That is a direct impact on GPs, social care, colleges, early learning and childcare, to name just a few. The UK Labour Government still has time to fix that, by confirming that the full cost to the delivery of public services of its national insurance increase will be reimbursed. We will pursue the UK Labour Government rigorously on that point.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes general question time.

Housing (Scotland) Bill: Financial Resolution

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-15211, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the Housing (Scotland) Bill. I invite Paul McLennan to move the motion.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament, for the purposes of any Act of the Scottish Parliament resulting from the Housing (Scotland) Bill, agrees to—

(a) any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3A of the Parliament’s Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act, and

(b) any charge or payment in relation to which Rule 9.12.4 of the Parliament’s Standing Orders applies arising in consequence of the Act.—[Paul McLennan]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The question on the motion will be put at decision time.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Claire Inglis was tortured and murdered in the home that she shared with her young son. Her killer had been bailed from court five times, despite dozens of convictions. Social services tried but failed to warn Claire that she was in danger.

Claire’s parents, Fiona and Ian, are still fighting for answers. I have previously raised their plight directly with the First Minister, and with his predecessor. Claire’s parents say:

“We should not have to come to parliament again, and on the third anniversary of our beloved daughter’s murder, to beg the First Minister for answers.

We feel trapped and unable to move on because we continue to be deprived of basic but vital information.”

Will the First Minister tell Fiona and Ian how much longer they must wait for the answers that they deserve?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I express to Fiona and Ian my deepest sympathies over the loss of their beloved daughter. I cannot imagine the pain, suffering and agony that they have endured.

Mr Findlay is correct: he has raised the issue with me previously. He and I have exchanged correspondence on the issue. As a consequence of that, we in the Government have taken steps to ask Stirling Council to undertake a further examination and exploration of the issues that are involved, and to engage directly with Claire’s parents. Obviously, we will discuss those issues in this exchange. I remain committed to making sure that the family receives the answers that they, understandably, deserve.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

When I wrote to Mr Swinney on behalf of Claire’s parents, he told me that he would reply “soon”. That was four months ago. Is that really good enough?

The Inglis family are far from alone in being failed by the justice system. Also in the chamber today is Denise Clair, who was raped by David Goodwillie and David Robertson. No credible explanation has ever been given for why the Crown Office did not prosecute. Frankly, the case stinks. Denise was forced to take civil action against the two men, and a judge agreed that she had been raped. She has since asked the Government to fund a private criminal prosecution, but she continues to be left in limbo.

Denise has suffered for 13 long years. Here is her question to the First Minister: will your Government do the right thing and support such a prosecution?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have engaged with Mr Findlay on the case of Claire Inglis, and we have made the request of Stirling Council to provide the satisfactory investigation that is required. However, in light of the exchanges that we have had today, I will look again at that issue, to determine whether there is further pressure that we need to apply for Stirling Council to do exactly that.

Denise Clair has pursued her case through a civil action, and the court has come to its judgment on that question. I am aware that she has made an application for legal aid assistance to take forward—forgive me. She has approached ministers to take the steps that are necessary to ensure that her case can be pursued as a private prosecution, and the issue is being considered by the Government.

However, I say to Mr Findlay that the Government has taken too long to consider the request that Ms Clair has made of us. When I saw the news reports at the weekend, I asked for greater urgency to be given to engagement with her agents on that question, because I am dissatisfied with how long it has taken. Through Mr Findlay, I express my apology to Ms Clair today.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I am sure that Denise Clair will be pleased to hear that. As Thomas Ross KC said,

“There is nothing complicated or complex about this decision.”

We have the family of a murder victim with no answers, and we have a double rape victim who has no answers. That is typical of how victims are treated because of the Scottish National Party’s weak justice agenda.

The First Minister often cites judicial independence, but just this week, he subverted judicial independence. Two days ago, John Swinney and his colleagues sat there and applauded themselves for passing a bad law to free thousands of criminals early from Scotland’s prisons. That will result in more crime, more victims and more pressure on our police. Crucially, the SNP’s new law does not give prison governors the power to block the release of those who are considered to be too dangerous. Why not?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the significance of the cases that Mr Findlay puts to me today, but there are some fundamental points that I need to put on the record about them. The granting of bail in the Claire Inglis case was an independent judgment that was arrived at by the courts. It is wrong for ministers to be involved in those cases. I accept that there will be vigorous debate about the appropriateness of judgments, but those decisions are taken by the independent judiciary, and none of us wants to have a judiciary that is anything other than independent.

In the case of Denise Clair, a judgment was arrived at by the Crown, which independently assessed the case for prosecution. Again—and I know that Mr Findlay would not be arguing for this—nobody accepts that those decisions should be taken by a process that is anything other than independent.

In relation to the legislation that the Parliament has passed, Mr Findlay knows that the Government has had to take that step because of the significant rise in the prison population, requiring ministers to ensure that our prisons are safe, especially for prison officers to work in. The reason why there is no governor’s veto is that the Government has amended the timescale under which individuals will be released from prison, but we have put in significant safeguards to ensure that those who are convicted of domestic violence and serious assaults are not included in the release scheme that we have put in place.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

When the SNP previously ordered the mass early release of prisoners, the governor’s veto was a vital safeguard, but John Swinney now thinks that he knows better than Scotland’s prison governors. People in the real world are looking at this in utter disbelief. Soft-touch SNP justice prioritises the rights and interests of dangerous criminals.

Claire’s mum, Fiona, told me:

“There is something far wrong with Scotland’s justice system when victims are kept in the dark and not treated as a priority.”

When it is about releasing prisoners, the SNP rushes through a law in days. When it is about justice for victims, it leaves them waiting for years. Does John Swinney have any regrets about his Government’s treatment of crime victims?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will always take seriously the concerns of victims and will take the necessary action to ensure that the interests of victims are fully and properly taken into account in all the steps that the Government takes.

I point out that, in relation to the early release schemes that have been put in place previously, there have been opportunities for victims to be fully advised about the circumstances of release through the victim notification scheme, should they wish to take up that opportunity, which is not always the case.

I will correct one of the points that I made in my earlier answer. I should have made reference to sexual assault as being an offence for which constraints are applied in the legislation.

I do not think that Mr Findlay’s characterisation of mass early release is at all appropriate. The Government took steps to ensure that our prison system is safe for those who work in it, just as Mr Findlay’s colleagues in the then United Kingdom Government did. The difference is that this Government came to Parliament, set out its case and asked for parliamentary consent to the steps that the Government was taking. That is what we do in a democracy.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Yesterday, the Institute for Fiscal Studies published a devastating report on the state of Scotland’s national health service under the Scottish National Party. It says:

“Performance in the Scottish NHS remains below pre-pandemic levels across many measures. Even more concerningly, many measures of performance have continued to worsen over the last year.”

Most damning, it points out that, although the NHS in Scotland has proportionally higher spending and more staff, recovery in Scotland’s health service is lagging behind that of the NHS in England on every measure. Does John Swinney accept that SNP incompetence and mismanagement are bad for Scotland’s health?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The NHS in Scotland relies on the commitment and contribution of thousands of members of staff the length and breadth of the country, and I record my thanks to them for the work that they put in to ensure that we are well cared for in the national health service.

The NHS is recovering from the Covid pandemic, and we are making progress in that respect. We know that more work has to be done, but information that is available shows that there have been improvements in the latest quarter, with reductions in the length of the waiting lists for diagnostics and in-patient and day-case activity, as well as an improvement in cancer performance.

I accept that work remains to be done to improve the performance of the national health service, but the Government is putting in the investment and maintaining the focus to enable that to happen.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

It is not just patients who are being failed; it is staff, too, so they will not take kindly to being used as human shields in the SNP Government’s defence.

John Swinney can try to spin the facts all he likes, but the devastating incompetence of the SNP is clear to see. Towards the end of his answer, he focused on inputs, but the Government needs to focus on outcomes, because, on Tuesday, it was revealed that the number of patients who have been stuck on an NHS waiting list for more than a year has now risen to more than 100,000. There are now more than 863,000 patients on an NHS waiting list, which is equivalent to one in six Scots. At the same time, we are carrying out 50,000 fewer operations compared with pre-pandemic levels, and delayed discharge has soared.

When will John Swinney stop defending the indefensible, admit that his SNP Government has failed and change direction?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I think that members of the national health service workforce will welcome the investment that the Government has made to ensure that NHS staffing has gone up by 26 per cent in the period between when this Government came to office and now. In cancer care, for example, the consultant oncologist workforce has increased by 50.4 per cent over the past 10 years.

The Government is investing in our NHS staff and, into the bargain, we have put in place pay settlements that have meant that we have not had to suffer and endure industrial action in the NHS in Scotland.

I point out to Mr Sarwar that, at the end of September, the number of patient waits for one of the eight key diagnostic tests showed a decrease of 7.4 per cent. The most recent data also shows that 73.2 per cent of patients were treated on time, within the 62-day cancer waiting time target, which is higher than the figure in the previous quarter.

I am the first to acknowledge that we have challenges in recovering from the Covid pandemic, but the Government is making the investment and the interventions to ensure that our national health service performs in a fashion that meets the needs of the people of Scotland.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

That answer again demonstrates that the First Minister has his head in the sand. The IFS makes the point that we have disproportionately higher spending and more staff in Scotland, but our performance is poorer than England’s. That points not to staff being wrong or resources being wrong but to a failure of leadership and a failure of the Government.

The uncomfortable reality for John Swinney is that no public service in Scotland is safe from SNP incompetence. On his watch, our NHS has plunged into a doom loop of soaring waiting lists and poorer health outcomes; our schools, which were once the envy of the world, have seen collapsing standards and rising violence; our prisons are left in tatters, with prisoners being let out early because of mismanagement of our criminal justice system; and our housing sector is in disarray, with soaring homelessness numbers and spiralling rents.

The fact is that, after 17 years of the SNP, every institution in Scotland is weaker. How many people have to lose their lives, how many patients have to go private, how many people have to be trapped in hospital and how many staff have to be pushed to breaking point before John Swinney accepts that he and his Government have failed and that Scotland needs a new direction?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

On a range of policies, the Government is delivering the progress that people in Scotland require. In the face of 14 years of austerity from the Conservative Government on housing, the Scottish Government has built more affordable houses per head of population than have been built in England or Wales—and more than were built when the Labour Party was in government in Scotland—in the face of Tory austerity from London.

If Mr Sarwar believes that the solution to all our problems in Scotland is the election of a Labour Government, I ask him to have a conversation with pensioners in Scotland. In the first few months of a Labour Government, pensioners in this country have been betrayed by that Labour Government, which promised change, but all it did was slash financial support for pensioners in our country by cutting winter fuel payments. If that is what change means, Scotland does not need change; it needs progress under an SNP Government.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

World leaders have once again failed to make progress at the global climate conference. They all know the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels, and the public gets it, too. Polling from the think tank Uplift shows that, in Scotland, most business leaders back the transition to a fossil-free energy system. However, the Scottish Government has still not published or set out the new energy strategy that is supposed to shift Scotland away from fossil fuels. It is still sitting on the First Minister’s desk, nearly two years after the draft was published. Scotland needs clarity, our renewables industry and the energy workforce need clarity, and the Parliament needs to see the strategy, too, so that we can see whether the Scottish Government is providing proper funding. Will the First Minister finally end the delay and publish the strategy before next week’s budget?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government’s direction on energy policy and renewables is crystal clear. That was demonstrated by the Government’s publication of the green industrial strategy, which gives all the certainty in the world about the Government’s devotion and dedication to making the transition to a green economy through the support of renewable energy in Scotland. Mr Harvie knows that, since 1990, we have halved our emissions in Scotland, we have effectively decarbonised our electricity networks, and we are making the investments to enable us to deliver the transition to net zero. All those themes will be reflected in the Government’s budget next week.

Mr Harvie will know that some of the judgments and issues within the energy strategy are informed and influenced by recent court decisions. The Government is taking time to ensure that we properly reflect on those issues as we formulate the energy strategy, which will be published when those conclusions have been reached.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The lack of the strategy does not bring the clarity that the First Minister is claiming exists. He tells us again that his priorities include tackling the climate emergency. Driving down transport emissions will be a key part of achieving that. That is why, during our time in government, the Scottish Greens cut the cost of public transport by providing free bus travel for under-22s and scrapping peak-time rail fares. We know that cutting fares is critical to driving up public transport use while driving down emissions. Instead of continuing that work, however, the First Minister has brought back peak rail fares, which has undermined climate action and increased the cost of living.

The Scottish Greens have now set out plans for a national bus fare cap to ensure that nobody pays more than £2 for their regular bus journey. Can the First Minister see that public transport costs need to come down, and will he commit now to making that plan happen?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government has delivered reductions in the cost of travel for many people in Scotland, not least under-22s, who now enjoy free bus travel around the country. That is a very welcome development and a step that assists young people’s mobility and supports their involvement in our society.

We have taken steps on peak fares. We extended the pilot exercise to establish whether there was an evidence base to demonstrate that the pilot sufficiently justified the investment of public money to meet our climate objectives. Unfortunately, the results of the pilot exercise did not justify the public investment. As Mr Harvie knows, the financial pressures on the Government are such that we have to be very careful about the judgments that we make. We will reflect on all those questions as we consider the Government’s budget and take the necessary steps to achieve our objectives on net zero.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the United Kingdom Government’s reported allocation of between £295 million and £330 million to cover the increase in employer national insurance contributions for the public sector in Scotland. (S6F-03592)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If the figures that were reported this week are all that will be provided, that would mean that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be short-changing services that the public depend on by more than £400 million.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

In evidence to the Finance and Public Administration Committee on Tuesday, the Office for Budget Responsibility confirmed that Labour’s national insurance hike will mean that employees will be £800 a year worse off as a direct result of Labour’s budget, with low-paid workers disproportionately impacted. Business investment will fall by £25 billion, and taxes are projected to rise by £62.2 billion per year by 2029-30. The UK economy will continue to stagnate, growing by only 4.3 per cent between 2019 and 2028. Does the First Minister agree that, if that is what a Labour Government looks like, independence cannot come soon enough?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Gibson knows the economic damage that has been done to the country by one of the biggest decisions that was taken as part of the United Kingdom—the decision about Brexit. That has inflicted significant economic damage on the Scottish economy, which is one of the arguments for independence, because with it we would be able to resume our participation in the European Union.

The change in employer national insurance contributions is an indication of the fact that the United Kingdom’s public finances are in such a weak position that action of that type must be taken. However, it is also damaging the Scottish economy, because of the financial burden that it places on public services, businesses and organisations that we depend on. As things stand, people and organisations such as general practitioners, social care providers, colleges and early learning and childcare practitioners do not appear to be being compensated by the United Kingdom Government. Mr Gibson is absolutely right to point out the damage that is being done to the Scottish economy by those measures. Independence cannot come soon enough to address the issues.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

It is good to see that the First Minister has not changed the record. The Scottish National Party made a policy decision to have a larger civil service in Scotland and to pay public sector workers more, despite failing to deliver meaningful public sector reform. Is the blame for the national insurance cash crisis that the SNP Government now faces not down to the economic incompetence of both Governments: that of the SNP, for the public sector to become too big, and of Labour, for using national insurance as a means to claw back the vast amounts of money—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Hoy.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

—that it had committed to above-inflation pay increases in the public sector?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Every day that I am First Minister is a day when I learn something new.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

You need to learn a lot more.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

First Minister, if I may stop you. I would be very grateful if members ceased commenting from a sedentary position. If you have not been called to speak, please do not speak.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

My new piece of learning today is that Craig Hoy, a Conservative, has decided that it is a good idea to come to the Parliament and lecture me about economic incompetence after what his Government inflicted on the people of the United Kingdom.

I cannot remember, so I may be saying something that is not backed up by fact, but I know that Mr Findlay was a great supporter of Liz Truss, and I suspect that Craig Hoy was, too—there were tons of them on that side of the chamber—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

That is not true.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Oh—so Craig Hoy was not a supporter of Liz Truss. He was probably a supporter of one of the other economic incompetents in the Tories who damaged our economy.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Does the First Minister recognise that the very reason that Scotland is receiving an unprecedented additional £5 billion in the budget is because the UK Labour Government has taken tough decisions to raise additional revenue? What would the First Minister say—[Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Marra.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

What would the First Minister say to the Office for Budget Responsibility, given what it told the Parliament’s Finance and Public Administration Committee this week? The OBR said that, without the necessary tax changes, Governments would

“see your debts rise”

and rise

“for ever”,

and that

“Governments cannot provide ... more and more public services as a share of the economy”

and not pay for them

“without seeing their debts reach an unsustainable level.”

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am grateful to Mr Marra for putting those comments on the record; I am sure that the Office for Budget Responsibility said other things that were possibly not quite as convenient for Mr Marra’s narrative as the ones that he has selected today.

I say to Mr Marra that we are about to go through a process in which we are all going to have to make a contribution to deciding what is allocated to different policy areas in Scotland. Mr Marra and all his colleagues on the Labour side of the chamber are not innocent bystanders in that process. They can act to assist and support the Scottish—

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

There is £5 billion—

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am not sure that Mr Marra is interested in listening to my answer, given the way that he is shouting at me.

All that I would say to Mr Marra is this: if he wishes to see the resources that have been allocated as part of the United Kingdom budget process spent in Scotland, this Parliament has to pass a budget, and the responsibility is on Mr Marra to vote for the Government’s budget.

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

It is reported that the rise in national insurance contributions for employers will overwhelm the finances of charities such as the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which will face an estimated increased cost of £400,000 per annum—that is twice the cost of feeding all the animals in its care. I declare an interest as an SSPCA member. Have there been any discussions with the UK Government on the financial damage to the charitable sector in Scotland? Organisations such as the SSPCA cannot pass those costs on to anybody, so they must cut what they deliver.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I fear—well, I do not fear; I know—that the situation that Christine Grahame warns of in Parliament today is testing many charities and third sector organisations the length and breadth of the country. They have seen—or they will see, at the start of April—an overnight increase in their costs, without the revenue to support their activities.

Organisations such as the SSPCA, in the example that Christine Grahame puts to me—I know that she cares deeply about that organisation, given her commitment to animal welfare issues—will be facing difficulties, and I know that representations have been made to the United Kingdom Government in that respect.

From a Scottish Government perspective, I am concerned that organisations on which we depend to deliver services in Scotland will not be assisted by the changes that have been made.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to reduce the length of time that children are placed in temporary accommodation. (S6F-03572)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Additional investment of £42 million in affordable housing this year has been targeted to five local authorities with sustained temporary accommodation pressures. That funding is to increase the supply of social and affordable homes, including larger properties that are suitable for families, through acquisitions and bringing empty social homes back into use.

That is in addition to the record funding of more than £14 billion that the Government is allocating to local authorities to deliver a range of services, including homelessness services.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

In 2008, 9,535 people were living in temporary accommodation. In 2024, 16,330 people are living in temporary accommodation. This Government is presiding over disgraceful waits in temporary housing. One of the most appalling cases involved a child spending more than seven years in temporary accommodation in Edinburgh, with another person spending close to 2,900 days without a permanent home.

The Scottish National Party has been in power for 17 years, yet things go from bad to worse. Does the First Minister believe that a child should spend seven years in temporary accommodation? When will the Government finally get a grip of the situation, which should shame the First Minister and his Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I set out in my answer to Anas Sarwar earlier on, in the face of 14 years of Conservative austerity, this Government has built an average of 7,750 affordable homes each year since 2007. That is an average of 40 per cent more per annum than in the period 1999 to 2007. It is 45 per cent more affordable homes delivered per head of population than in England, and 70 per cent more than in Wales, during a period of intense austerity from the Conservative Government.

I do not want people to be living in temporary accommodation. That is why the Government is taking steps to improve the availability of rented accommodation. That will be part of the Housing (Scotland) Bill that Parliament will consider this afternoon, and I hope that Parliament will support the Government in the measures that we are bringing forward to strengthen and expand housing stock in Scotland.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

To ask the First Minister for what reason at least 69,000 patients reportedly waited more than an hour to be triaged in A and E departments in the first half of this year. (S6F-03591)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is important for me to stress that, for people who are seriously unwell or whose condition is life threatening, initial triage will have been started by paramedics before they arrive at hospital, with accident and emergency staff put on standby for the patient’s arrival for an immediate further assessment.

Nonetheless, any unnecessary delay is not acceptable, and we are working with national health service boards, through our improvement programme, to reduce delays at every part in the patient journey, in order to minimise risk and improve patient outcomes.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

As the First Minister knows, the reality is that the longer that people are forced to wait for that initial assessment, the greater the chance that their condition deteriorates.

That speaks to the bigger problem in our NHS. Dr Fiona Hunter, from the Royal College of Emergency Medicine in Scotland, said:

“Long waits for triage are yet another indicator of a system which is not functioning as it should.”

The Institute for Fiscal Studies report demonstrated clearly that the NHS in Scotland is underperforming, despite the hard work of the staff.

The First Minister is not an innocent bystander. After 17 years in power, does he accept that his Government is failing our NHS, our hard-working NHS staff and the patients in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Jackie Baillie will know that performance on four-hour waits across the whole country, in accident and emergency departments the length and breadth of Scotland, is better than it is in other parts of the United Kingdom. It is not good enough and it is not where it should be, but it is better than in other parts of the United Kingdom.

We have to focus on some of the practical issues that affect that performance. Some of it is about the demonstration of demand because we are dealing with an increasingly frail population that has been made more frail by the consequences of the Covid pandemic.

We are also dealing with acute and intense activity in our hospital estate, which is why the Government is putting such an effort into reducing delayed discharge to ensure that we free up the opportunity for patients to make the journey through hospital care and return to their homes where that is possible.

Those are the practical interventions that the Government is making to address the situation and ensure that in our accident and emergency system the initial assessment of patient condition can be undertaken as speedily and effectively as possible.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to general and constituency supplementary questions. If we are all concise, we will be able to fit more members in.

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

New research from PwC confirms that Scotland is leading the United Kingdom in the creation of green jobs, with the number tripling since 2021. That comes despite the news that Labour’s big plans to create green jobs, with the promised 1,000 GB energy jobs in the north-east, are now watered down to around 200 to 300 posts based in Aberdeen. What steps is the Scottish National Party Scottish Government taking to deliver a just transition for the north-east, as opposed to the empty promises that we are hearing from the UK Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government is committed to facilitating a just transition for the north-east of Scotland. Through the just transition fund, we have committed to more than £500 million of investment to support that journey by maintaining and creating jobs in low-carbon industries and contributing to the region’s future prosperity. We have dedicated £11 million for a package of skills interventions, including the energy skills transition hub, and we have allocated more than £75 million to help projects and communities across the north-east, including Moray, to create jobs, support innovation and secure the highly skilled workforce for the future.

Tim Eagle (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I quickly remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am a farmer.

Today, the NFUS has gathered hundreds of farmers from across Scotland outside of Parliament. Thousands more will be watching from all our constituencies across Scotland. Whether it is due to Labour’s cruel family farm tax, the lost or stolen Bew review money, or the lack of commitment from this Scottish National Party Government over multi-annual funding, farmers are worried about the future. They are worried about their own future, their children’s future and their businesses. All eyes are on Scotland for the budget. What reassurances will the First Minister give to all those farmers standing outside today?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not think that Mr Eagle helps the farming industry—[ Interruption .]

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

He is a farmer.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not think that Mr Eagle helps the farming industry by using language such as “lost or stolen” money. What language is that for a member of Parliament to use? [ Interruption .] I have given a cast-iron commitment that the £46 million will be put into the rural affairs budget of the Scottish Government so that farmers can appreciate that investment. That is a commitment from me, and Mr Eagle should take it seriously.

I am deeply troubled by what is happening as a result of the inheritance tax changes. I represent a large rural constituency, with many people involved in farming. The inheritance tax changes will be catastrophic for the sustainability of family farming. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands have both written to the United Kingdom Government to point out some of the issues that it has skated past in its rush to put in place those provisions, which will be deeply damaging to the farming industry.

For Mr Eagle to put any point to me about multi-annual funding, when the Conservative Government failed to deliver that and inflicted the shambles of Brexit on the farming industry in Scotland, is an absolute joke.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Last week it was reported that, despite the Government handing at least £4 million to health boards since 2022 to deliver health checks for vulnerable Scots who have a learning disability, and promising that those would be completed by March 2023, as of this year, not a single board has met that target, and some boards have offered no checks at all. This week, the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee was told by individuals who have a learning disability that they feel that they “remain unheard” and that they are

“not a priority for Scotland”.

What has happened to the £4 million that was given to health boards for an unfulfilled promise, what will be done to rectify that failure and will the first minister now apologise to those vulnerable Scots with learning disabilities who have been let down by his Government yet again?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am not familiar with the issue that Mr O’Kane has put to me today. If we have allocated £4 million to health boards, I would expect them to have followed up, delivered and applied that. I will investigate that in the light of today’s exchanges and reply in full to Mr O’Kane.

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

This week marks the beginning of the global 16 days of activism campaign to tackle and prevent violence against women and girls, which is key to creating a society where women and girls can live safely. With that in mind, what action is the Government taking to reduce violence against women and girls.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I welcome the question from Karen Adam. I had the privilege on Friday of launching the 16 days of activism on violence against women and girls in Perth, my home city, and to committing, as a local member of Parliament and as First Minister, to taking the necessary action to address this totally unacceptable curse in our society. What has to change is the behaviour and attitudes of men, and I commit in this Parliament to giving the leadership necessary to ensure that that is the case. Across Government, the work that we take forward in our equally safe strategy is the focal point for our interventions to ensure that this scourge is addressed.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The well-known road safety campaigner Neil Greig says that the Scottish Government’s proposal to cut the single-carriageway speed limit from 60mph to 50mph is

“a cheap gimmick that would do little to reduce death and injury”.

Those are his words, not mine. What it would do is increase journey times and costs for many rural road users, including those who use key routes such as the A9 and the A96. Instead of going down that route, why does the Scottish Government not improve road safety by finally delivering on its promise to fully dual the A9 and the A96?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government remains committed to the dualling of the A9 and the A96—[ Interruption .]—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—and is taking practical steps to advance those projects.

On the question of road speed, a consultation is under way. The reason why we are having a consultation is that there are different opinions about how best to tackle the issue. I am regularly pressed, as is the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, on the number of fatalities and accidents on our roads. We would be neglecting our duty if we did not examine what options are possible to address that situation.

I hear the comments that Mr Fraser puts on the record from an individual whom I know well and who contributes significantly on the subject. However, if members of Parliament want us to address the issue of fatalities on our roads, we have to explore what the options are for doing that. That is what the Government is doing.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The Scottish Human Rights Commission’s report “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands” makes desperate reading. It states that “urgent action is needed” to ensure access to healthcare and

“to eradicate rooflessness and hunger”

in the region, yet the Scottish Government has shelved its proposed human rights bill. Will the First Minister work with me to progress my member’s bill to enshrine the right to food in Scots law, in a bid to start addressing the report’s findings?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government will, of course, engage with Rhoda Grant on her legislative proposal in relation to the needs of individuals in rural and island communities, especially in the Highlands and Islands. The Government takes forward a range of interventions in healthcare, in transportation and in other aspects of public services that are designed to address the challenges that the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s report sets out. That will remain the Government’s focus as we take forward our programme of interventions in Scotland.

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The latest figures from Social Security Scotland show that, since their launch, the Scottish Government’s five family payments have paid more than £1 billion to families across Scotland to help to end child poverty. Meanwhile, the Labour United Kingdom Government at Westminster is maintaining the cruel two-child cap, which has forced thousands more children into poverty since Labour came to office, including in my Dundee City West constituency. Can the First Minister say more about the actions that the Scottish Government is taking to tackle poverty against the backdrop of disastrous Westminster policy making?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Modelling that was published in February estimated that Scottish Government policies would keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty this year. An estimated 60,000 children would be kept out of relative poverty through investment in our Scottish child payment alone. Our five family payments are providing financial support to families that could be worth around £25,000 by the time an eligible child turns 16, compared with less than £2,000 south of the border.

I am deeply concerned that the two-child limit remains part of the welfare system in the United Kingdom. I am stunned that an incoming Labour Government has not removed that anachronism from the welfare system, because it is condemning more and more children to live in poverty. One of the first actions of a Labour Government should have been to remove that cap.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

Two thousand patients of the Lerwick dental practice have been notified by text that they will be deregistered and left without care by early next year. Another 4,000 patients are at risk of deregistration. Just this morning, I heard from a constituent who is one of those 2,000 patients, who says:

“I am in tremendous pain with toothache. On phoning the dentist for emergency treatment, as this is all I can access now, I eventually got through, only to be told they would see what they could do and phone me back.”

She is still waiting for the call back.

It is clear that the independent, high street model of dentistry is failing national health service patients—disproportionately so in Shetland, where there is no alternative. Talk of long-term strategies does little to ease the agony for patients with toothache. Does the Scottish Government agree that everyone in Scotland should be able to access routine NHS dental care? If so, will the First Minister ensure that the model of delivery is re-examined, as the current system is quite clearly failing my constituents in Shetland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have been briefed by officials on the developing situation in Shetland, and I understand that they have met the board to discuss the issue as a matter of urgency. The latest news is undoubtedly a regressive step, and the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health will be overseeing through officials that appropriate mitigations are in place to ensure that the legitimate aspirations that Beatrice Wishart has put to me are fulfilled for her constituents in the Shetland Islands. The issue will have the focused attention of the public health minister, who will be happy to engage with Ms Wishart on the question.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s questions. There will now be a short suspension to allow people to leave the chamber and the public gallery.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is portfolio question time. The portfolio on this occasion is social justice. If members wish to ask a supplementary question, I encourage them to press their buttons during the relevant question.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the potential impact on population trends, what its response is to National Records of Scotland data showing that 2023 had the lowest number of recorded births since records began in 1855. (S6O-04021)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Scotland is not alone in experiencing falling birth rates, which is a trend across many high-income countries. That has significant implications for the sustainability of our economies, communities and public services, which is why our population strategy sets out our ambition to ensure that Scotland is the ideal place in which to raise a family.

In 2022, the ministerial population task force undertook research to explore family planning and ideal family size. The task force is now considering the next steps for that work, alongside the recent census data, to support people to have the number of children that they wish to have.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Scotland’s total fertility rate is now one of the world’s lowest, reaching a historic low of 1.28 last year, in comparison with 1.9 in Sweden, for example. It is now only 61 per cent of replacement level, which should worry us all. We have no powers over migration in Scotland, so without more children, public services and the economy will struggle as fewer working-age people support ever-growing numbers of dependants.

Does the Government accept what our European neighbours realised years ago, which is the need to address falling birth rates? If so, what further measures can the Government take to address this potentially existential crisis?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The Scottish Government is clear that it is not for us to seek to dictate or influence whether an individual should have a child or how many children they should choose to have. However, a key aim of the family-friendly strand of our population strategy is to ensure that we are creating the right conditions for people to have the number of children that they wish to have. The task force brings together relevant ministers from across the Scottish Government to ensure that we take a joined-up cross-portfolio approach to delivering on the ambitions that the strategy sets out.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Kenny Gibson is quite right to raise those demographic concerns, which come at the same time as we are battling against rising rates of economic inactivity. What does the minister see as the top priority when it comes to policies to address economic inactivity?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

As we have talked about quite a lot, the issue of housing is very much connected with economic activity. Through our population strategy, we recognise that uncertainty about housing can impact on an individual’s decision to have a family, remain in a community and contribute to the economy.

Scotland has the right long-term plan for housing, and we are working at pace, in collaboration with partners, to critically review and prioritise the actions in those plans. Partnership working at all levels—UK Government, Scottish Government and local government, as well as with key sectoral partners—is needed to deliver that.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address the reported disproportionately lower levels of social security uptake among ethnic minority groups. (S6O-04022)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We are committed to ensuring that everyone takes up the benefits that they are entitled to and we are supporting ethnic minority communities to access those payments. That includes funding for accessible advice providers who support ethnic minority clients, engagement with faith-based groups and co-location of local delivery services in community spaces that people already attend.

Information about benefits is translated into 12 community languages and people can also request translation support for more than 100 additional languages. Social Security Scotland has undertaken user research with people who speak English as a second language, insights from which will influence work to support take-up.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Analysis of client and applicant data by the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights shows that only 6.3 per cent of applicants are black and minority ethnic, which is well below the Scottish population average. That analysis also found particular underrepresentation in disability payments and that people were more likely to have applications rejected. The Scottish Government’s stats show that relative poverty among BME groups is more than 50 per cent, compared with only 20 per cent in the overall population.

We know that social security is an important part of the anti-poverty strategy, but reductions in the development of marketing campaigns could impact on groups that are less heard and less able to access information. Will the cabinet secretary reflect on that and say what she will do with regard to those budgets?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I thank Paul O’Kane for raising that important issue. We are determined to improve the take-up of all benefits from all groups in society, but I recognise that there are some concerning statistics, particularly around the ethnic minority communities and the disabled, as Paul O’Kane recognises.

I mentioned some of the user research work that is being undertaken to determine exactly the reasons behind that. It is the responsibility of the Government, not of individuals, to make the process as easy as possible, and we are determined to do everything that we can. Marketing is one example. There might be other barriers, but we are determined to tackle them and, therefore, to increase take-up.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

Between April and June this year, there were 25,230 applications for adult disability payment, of which only 6 per cent had any involvement with VoiceAbility, an organisation that is funded heavily by the Scottish Government.

Does Ms Somerville believe that that is value for money? If not, will she carry out a review to see whether the money could be better targeted towards citizens advice bureaux and other such organisations?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I hope that Mr Balfour agrees that the principle behind the services that VoiceAbility provides is important. We are determined to ensure that that type of support is available to people, so I am concerned about anything that suggests that the people who might benefit from that service are not coming forward. Again, we need to look at the barriers to that, and I would be happy to keep Mr Balfour updated on that work in due course, as it progresses.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next question is from Jamie Greene, who joins us remotely.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I apologise for not being in the chamber.

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reported comments from the director of the human rights charity, Making Rights Real, that “the long arm of the government often stretches to silence organisations that receive funding from the state”. (S6O-04023)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The Scottish Government welcomes discussion and challenge on all matters of public policy, and from all quarters. It is fundamental to the health of our democracy.

I therefore respectfully disagree with the characterisation that Jamie Green has relayed. Internal governance procedures are in place to ensure that public funding is awarded without prejudice or a single point of influence. They include an internal audit system, a governance and accountability team, and accountable officer processes that ensure that funding is awarded on the basis of value for money and the outcomes and objectives that best serve the people of Scotland.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

The minister is welcome to disagree with me, but I note that I was directly quoting the concerns of a charity and third sector organisation. Those were not my own comments or views, so she is, in fact, disagreeing with that organisation.

I hear what the Government is saying about how it believes that funding is free from prejudice, but the same article that I quoted from in my initial question alludes to a number of third sector organisations that are genuinely worried that, if they criticise the Scottish Government, they will put their funding at risk. The fact that they will not even share those concerns publicly, I think, vindicates that very possibility.

I therefore ask the minister to be clear and give a cast-iron guarantee to any charities or third sector organisations that are in receipt of public money that they are completely free to criticise the Scottish Government and that they will face absolutely no consequences whatsoever if they do.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

It is certainly not the case that the Scottish Government is silencing any criticism.

Since I came into post, we have had to make some very difficult decisions. I, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, have engaged fully with a wide variety of stakeholders. We have heard the significant disappointment in certain areas from stakeholders, including those who are in receipt of public funding. That criticism can also readily be found in the public domain.

Our ask of stakeholders is that they stay the course with us as we continue to work with them to test and refine, for instance, the proposals around the human rights bill ahead of its introduction next session.

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

Would the minister agree that the Scottish Government’s ambition to embed human rights into Scotland’s public services is possible only through continued close working with third sector and voluntary organisations, and that collaborative work has massively benefited Scottish society in recent years, despite the unprecedented challenges of austerity and the cost of living crisis?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I whole-heartedly agree. It is evident that the dedication and expertise of our diverse and dynamic third sector have been crucial in shaping Scotland’s policy landscape. That is especially the case in relation to our work around seeking to better embed the delivery of human rights in our public services.

I note, again, that I am grateful for the support and challenge of the organisations that have been involved in that work to date. I look forward to our continued close collaboration as we progress the human rights agenda across Scotland.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Question 4 has been withdrawn.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what support is available this winter to people on low incomes, particularly as temperatures drop and in light of the reported predicted increase in energy prices. (S6O-04025)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

This winter, we are forecasted to invest more than £65 million in our winter heating benefits. Additionally, our island cost crisis emergency fund and energy efficiency programmes, warmer homes Scotland and area-based schemes provide vital support to households in or at risk of fuel poverty.

This year alone, we are spending £134 million to mitigate United Kingdom Government policies through schemes such as the discretionary housing payments and the Scottish welfare fund, which provide vital support to households struggling with housing and energy costs.

I will soon make a statement setting out in detail this Government’s support for older people.

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

Over the past few weeks, I have been hosting a number of informative drop-ins across Banffshire and Buchan Coast for constituents who are concerned about high fuel bills. Amid all the uncertainty caused by the UK Government’s budgetary decisions this winter, low-income households in Scotland can at least be assured that they can access regular annual support in the form of the Scottish winter heating payment. Is the cabinet secretary aware of how many households are likely to benefit from that payment compared with the unreliable UK cold weather payment that it replaced in 2022?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Our winter heating payment will provide a guaranteed payment of £58.75 this winter. That payment was made to almost 418,000 households last winter alone, totalling £23 million of investment.

The Department for Work and Pensions cold weather payments that were provided to Scottish residents prior to the introduction of the winter heating payment exceeded £20 million in only two of the previous 11 years, and they have not surpassed the projected £24.4 million that was invested in the delivery of the winter heating payment in 2024-25.

The winter heating payment breaks the link with weather dependency by providing financial support no matter the weather. Low-income households will automatically be paid, so they do not have to, ironically, hope for sustained cold weather in order to receive support.

Tim Eagle (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how many houses have been built in rural communities, as a direct result of funding from the rural and islands housing fund, since the fund was established. (S6O-04026)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Since the rural and islands housing fund was first launched in 2016-17, it has supported the delivery of 253,000 houses. The fund plays an important role in offering support to community organisations, private landowners and others to deliver affordable homes. It complements the significant delivery of homes in rural and island areas by councils and registered social landlords through our mainstream affordable housing supply programme.

Tim Eagle (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Research by Scottish Land & Estates revealed that more than £100 million of funding that had been earmarked for rural and island communities was diverted to housing projects in Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Given that several rural local authorities—including that of the Minister for Housing’s constituency—have declared housing emergencies, how does that decision square with the Scottish National Party Government’s talk about reversing rural depopulation?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

That is not correct. Funding through Scotland’s main affordable housing supply programme is not ring fenced for urban or rural areas; therefore, there is no money to be returned, for analysis purposes. Projects may be recorded as rural or urban based on population and accessibility data and according to the definition that is set out in published guidance. The share of funding that each local authority area receives through the affordable housing supply programme is informed by the strategic housing investment plan and the housing and planning delivery framework that is agreed with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, and that supports the delivery of local authority strategic affordable housing priorities.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Can the minister lay out what support the Scottish Government is providing to rural and island areas, in addition to the direct grants that are provided by the rural and islands housing fund, to support community-led and owned housing initiatives, such as the impressive work of the Gatehouse development initiative in South Scotland?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

In addition to the £30 million in the rural and islands housing fund, which is available for communities, we are providing a three-year package of financial support of almost £1 million to Communities Housing Trust and South of Scotland Community Housing to provide support and expertise to communities to enable the delivery of affordable homes across rural and island communities.

We are also continuing to support the delivery of affordable homes in rural and island communities through the mainstream affordable housing supply programme, including up to £25 million to support affordable homes for key workers, where there is identified need.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will commit to redrafting its disability equality plan, in light of the reported criticisms from the organisations that were asked to be involved in its co-production. (S6O-04027)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I recently met Jeremy Balfour, other members and disabled people’s organisations to discuss the plan. It will take a collective effort and investment over several years to deliver equality for disabled people. This first publication is one step on that journey and does not represent the full extent of our ambition.

Due to the challenging fiscal situation, difficult decisions had to be made to ensure that this first stage of our plan is deliverable. The plan lays important foundations around improved accountability and collective leadership, and future phases can build on that to deliver impactful change.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Clearly, the minister was not at the meeting that others remember, because Disability Equality Scotland, Glasgow Disability Alliance and Inclusion Scotland have described their members as “raging” with the Scottish Government. They say that the co-production process has been a “sham” and that they are left with a “weak” and “diluted” disability plan. To quote Tressa Burke, GDA’s chief executive, the plan offers

“no commitment to meaningful action and no progress towards disabled people’s equality”.

After spending 20 months of time and resources trying to collaborate with the Scottish Government, co-production has collapsed and DPOs have withdrawn support. That is a very familiar tale when it comes to the Scottish National Party Government. It says that it has engaged, but the problem is that it does not listen. Yet again it has failed to deliver on its promises. Will the minister make urgent changes to the plan, given that not one of the stakeholders’ five key asks has been met by the current version?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I reassure the Parliament and the member that I have extensively engaged with disabled people’s organisations and that I am in regular contact with them. We have taken the time that was needed to genuinely engage with disabled people’s organisations, and to fully consider their feedback and make changes wherever possible. We have heard their concerns loud and clear. That is what meaningful co-operation requires, which reflects my commitment to ensuring that the plan can and will be delivered. Collective leadership, accountability and disability competence underpin every action in the plan. We are undertaking dedicated cross-governmental work in order to achieve that.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I will take a couple of supplementary questions.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I was dismayed to read Keir Starmer’s comments on the

“bulging benefits bill blighting our society.”

That type of rhetoric perpetuates the stigmatisation of social security support and deters people who need support—including disabled people, many of whom we know have a high instance of poverty in the family—from seeking it.

Many of my colleagues will have just donned a Christmas jumper for Save the Children, which is looking to reduce the stigma around poverty. Does the Government agree that its equality and human rights fund and the support that it will provide to disabled people’s organisations this year will be very welcome?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I agree with Clare Adamson’s comments. Our £5 million equality and human rights fund is helping to tackle inequality and discrimination. The forecast spend for 2024-25 on the disability portfolio that is included in the fund is £2.1 million, which is inclusive of core grant funding to disabled people’s organisations—Glasgow Disability Alliance, Disability Equality Scotland and Inclusion Scotland. The fund also includes a range of projects that deliver vital services to disabled people across Scotland.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The disability groups have heard all that previously and are not impressed. In fact, they were raging at the meeting that I was at—indeed, they were so angry with the minister’s and the Government’s actions that they swore. The Scottish National Party MSPs who groaned away when the question was raised should have been at that meeting, because they would have understood how angry those groups are. What new thing will the minister bring today to repair the relationship with that sector? Unless she brings something new, those groups will not believe her ever again.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I thank Willie Rennie for raising that point. I was at that meeting and I have already stated that I have heard the groups’ concerns and frustrations loud and clear. I will continue to engage, because it is my duty and my job to do so.

I recognise that the aspirations of disabled people and their organisations lie beyond what could be delivered in the first phase of the plan. Difficult decisions had to be made to ensure that the actions could be achieved in the challenging economic situation that Scotland faces. A budget is coming and I ask members across the chamber to vote for it, as I am hopeful that it will provide some kind of reassurance to disabled people’s organisations.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government, as part of its work on diversity, inclusion and equalities, what recent discussions the Minister for Equalities has had with ministerial colleagues regarding work to tackle Islamophobia. (S6O-04028)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The Scottish Government recognises the importance of tackling Islamophobia while ensuring equality and inclusion for everyone. In September, I wrote to ministers across Government to remind them of their legal duties under the public sector equality duty. I am now undertaking one-to-one meetings with them and continuing to work closely with those who hold shared portfolio interests, including the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, who has responsibility for hate crime. That will help us to explore what actions can be taken to improve equality and human rights and to reflect our collective agenda to tackle all forms of religious prejudice, including Islamophobia.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

After the events of this summer, it is more important than ever that we work to tackle Islamophobia and hate. The Scottish Government accepted the recommendations of the report on Islamophobia by the cross-party group on challenging racial and religious prejudice. Will the minister advise what progress the Scottish Government is making on implementing the recommendations, which include adopting a definition of Islamophobia and a workplace discrimination toolkit?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Our on-going work on tackling hate crime and the causes of Islamophobia is incorporated in our key priorities, which include delivery of the hate crime strategy, as well as wider cross-governmental activities. Our approach is supported by equality stakeholders, and there are regular opportunities to review priorities for tackling all forms of hatred and prejudice, including Islamophobia. The United Kingdom Government is considering the issue, too, and we will consider any decisions that it makes with implications for our own approach to adopting a definition in due course.

Older People’s Energy Costs

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a statement by Shirley-Anne Somerville on supporting older people with increasing energy costs.

Further to an earlier point of order, I note that some aspects of the Scottish Government’s statement have appeared in the media and, therefore, in the public domain before the Parliament’s elected members have had an opportunity to put questions to the Government. It is the Government’s responsibility to manage information to avoid such a situation occurring, which is disrespectful to the Parliament.

The cabinet secretary has written to me to apologise. In the interests of our constituents and public transparency, I will allow the statement to be made, but I have asked the cabinet secretary to shorten the statement to allow more time for questions.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am grateful for your clarification. Normally, spokesmen and spokeswomen get early sight of a ministerial statement, but, having spoken to my colleagues, I understand that that has only just happened, which means that it will be difficult to properly scrutinise the statement. Have you thought of asking the Government to move the statement to later today—perhaps before decision time—so that the Parliament can properly scrutinise the very important decision that is going to be made?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Mr Balfour. It is, of course, convention that the Scottish Government strives to ensure that members have as much advance sight of statements as possible. We will continue with this item of business, but your comments are on the record. I will now pass to the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Before I make my statement, let me apologise to you once again—and, indeed, to members—for the unfortunate early coverage of some of the content of my statement in the media this morning. Regretfully, the coverage gave high-level information regarding the announcement that I am about to make.

Presiding Officer, we take very seriously your guidance that details of any major announcement should not be publicly released before it is made to the Parliament. Accordingly, as you said, I have written to you to formally apologise, and I am grateful for the opportunity to make a shortened version of the statement and to answer members’ questions. I add an apology to Opposition spokespeople for the fact that I have not provided them with early sight of my statement, as I usually do.

I turn to my statement. As members will know, the United Kingdom Government announced its decision on 29 July to restrict entitlement to the winter fuel payment from this winter to people in receipt of pension credit and other means-tested benefits. That meant that an important provision of financial support that had up until now been available to all pensioners across the UK was abolished. The decision was taken with less than an hour’s notice to and no discussion with the Scottish Government.

As a result of the decision, Scotland’s share of the block grant adjustment funding, which we had planned to use to introduce pension age winter heating payment, our like-for-like replacement for the winter fuel payment, was cut by £147 million—a cut of more than 80 per cent to that budget. That had an immediate and profound impact on our ability to continue as planned and to offer our payment as the universal benefit that we had intended implement this year.

As members will be aware, we could not identify the additional funding that was required in-year to mitigate the UK Government’s decision. In addition, the timing of the UK Government announcement meant that alternative approaches to either a universal payment or the means-tested approach that was introduced by the UK Government could not be implemented in the time that was available to us.

We have repeatedly urged the UK Government to reverse the decision; indeed, the Parliament has supported that call. However, our representations have been ignored and payments of the benefit will be delivered by the Department for Work and Pensions under an agency agreement with Scottish ministers this winter. That approach will at least ensure that vital support is available to those eligible pensioners who are most in need of help with their fuel bills this winter.

Unfortunately, that means that, once again, we are in a position in which the Scottish Government is having to mitigate the impact of the UK Government’s damaging decisions on social security policy. There has been a change, but the change is that we are now mitigating the actions of a Labour Government rather than those of a Tory one.

The Scottish Government provides a wide range of heating cost support to our pensioners. For example, our winter heating payment guarantees a reliable annual payment, and—unlike the UK Government’s cold weather payment—it does that regardless of the weather, the temperature or proximity to a weather station.

We are also continuing our child winter heating payment, which, last year, provided support to more than 30,000 children, young people and their families who had higher energy needs due to disability or a health condition. That benefit is not available elsewhere in the UK.

Meanwhile, our warmer homes Scotland scheme and our area-based schemes support people who are experiencing fuel poverty to make their homes warmer and more fuel efficient. In the past decade, those two programmes have supported more than 150,000 households living in, or at risk of, fuel poverty.

All those programmes are valuable, but we all recognise that households across the country are acutely feeling the twin pressures of the cuts to social security budgets that have been made over many years by successive UK Governments—Conservative and now Labour—and of rising energy costs, despite Labour’s promise that people’s energy bills would fall if Labour was in government. Bills are set to rise again in January.

This year alone, the Scottish Government has already spent £134 million on mitigating the effects of UK Government welfare decisions. Although we cannot possibly mitigate the effects of every decision that is made by the UK Government, we are determined to do more where it is possible for us to do so.

I am therefore announcing today that the Government will invest a further £20 million in the Scottish welfare fund’s budget, which will be distributed to councils this financial year. That increase will help councils to meet the increased demands on the fund that exist as a result of decisions by Westminster.

I am also confirming today that we will invest an additional £20 million in the warmer homes Scotland scheme, which focuses on long-term sustainable measures. That additional funding will help a wider group of households to install energy efficiency measures and more efficient heating systems, which will save them an average of around £300 per year in energy bills.

Finally, for this year, in response to the calls that have been made by a coalition of housing and anti-poverty organisations for a shift in spending from crisis intervention to prevention, I will direct an additional £1 million of grant funding to registered social landlords and third sector partners for tenancy sustainment and homelessness prevention work.

Although those measures will go some way to allaying the fears of older people in Scotland ahead of winter, the Government recognises that more must be done. That is precisely why I have consistently committed to keeping the eligibility for pension age winter heating payments under review.

After careful consideration, I am announcing today to Parliament that, ahead of next winter, I will bring forward regulations to introduce a universal pension age winter heating payment for every Scottish pensioner in the winter of 2025-26. That universal benefit, which will provide much-needed support that is not available anywhere else in the UK, will deliver support across Scotland’s older people, as we had always intended to do before the UK Government decided to cut the payment. It will help to mitigate the increases in energy costs, provide vital cost of living support for all pensioner households and help to reduce pensioner poverty.

The full details of our proposed approach will be set out in the Scottish Government’s budget. However, I can announce that pensioners in Scotland who are in receipt of a relevant qualifying benefit, such as pension credit, and who, this winter, will receive payments of £200 or £300, depending on their age, will continue to receive those payments automatically next winter. In addition, we will introduce universal payments of £100 to every other pensioner household. That will ensure that those pensioners who are in receipt of pension credit or other means-tested benefits will receive a higher amount of support that will protect their incomes. At the same time, it will ensure that support is provided to all pensioner households. Such support will not be available elsewhere in the UK.

We have not taken that decision lightly, given the significant pressures on the Scottish Government’s budget, but we are determined to stay true to our values. On our watch, we will treat people in this country with fairness, dignity and respect. We will not abandon older people in this or any winter, and we will continue to protect our pensioners from the harsh reality of a UK Labour Government.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for those questions, after which we will move to the next item of business. Members who wish to put a question should press their request-to-speak buttons.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I note what you said, Presiding Officer, in your opening remarks. The Scottish Government was rightly angered by the UK Government not giving any notice of changes to the winter fuel payment and, therefore, undermining the necessary scrutiny, but the same thing has happened this afternoon: we have not had prior sight of the statement to allow us to scrutinise it properly.

There is more than a hint of irony in today’s announcement, because the Scottish National Party moans constantly about its hands being tied, fiscally, by the bad deeds of Westminster when, as the Scottish Fiscal Commission rightly said a few months ago, some of the real pressure on budgets comes from the Scottish Government’s decisions, so it is simply not true when ministers argue that they had absolutely no choice but to leave pensioners out in the cold.

I have two questions for the cabinet secretary. First, does she admit that the SNP is hoodwinking pensioners by pretending that it is bringing back the full winter fuel payment when that is simply not the case? Secondly, the cabinet secretary said in her statement that she will bring forward regulations, so will she confirm whether she will do that via primary legislation and, if so, when that will happen?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I apologised to Opposition spokespeople at the beginning of my remarks, and I now do so directly to Liz Smith. I hope that she has known me well enough for long enough to know that what has happened was absolutely not my intention.

We have returned to providing a universal payment for pensioners, and we are determined to hold to that important principle. If anyone is concerned about the principles behind social security, that should be because of the discussion that Russell Findlay has instigated since taking over leadership of the Scottish Conservatives. He has questioned the amount that we spend on social security in Scotland and, when I asked him directly whether that meant that he wants to cut money for low-income families, disabled people, carers or pensioners, he could not give me an answer. That is most concerning. We see the payment as an investment in our people and an important protection for our pensioners.

Liz Smith asked about the regulations, which we will make using secondary legislation, as we have done with all benefits since passing the Social Security (Scotland) Bill in 2018.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

It would be customary to thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement. We note the short period of time that she had, but we, of course, read her plans in some detail in today’s press.

I welcome the support that is finally being offered this winter. The cabinet secretary knows that I have always said that more could be done this winter. I have consistently asked in the chamber about the £42 million that will come as a result of UK Government decisions about the household support fund. Will the cabinet secretary finally provide some clarity on what will be done with the Barnett consequentials that will come as a result of spending this winter?

In addition, we have always said that the pension-age winter heating payment, which is devolved to Scotland, provides an opportunity to widen the criteria beyond those receiving pension credit. I again point to the in-year announcement of £1.5 billion of Barnett consequentials for the Scottish Government, with the figure rising to £3.4 billion in the budget next year. I ask the cabinet secretary whether it is as a result of that spending that she is able to announce that she will bring forward regulations on the pension-age winter heating payment, given that she previously said that that would be impossible because she did not have the money and that she

“cannot base a budget on a wing, a prayer and a promise”.—[Official Report, 3 October 2024; c 44.]

Finally, will she speak to the Poverty and Inequality Commission about its opinion of her payment?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I gently point out to Paul O’Kane that we would not have to take mitigating action this winter if the Labour Government had not whipped money away from pensioners. That is why I have had to make my announcement today. As well as asking some questions, which he is obviously right to do, Mr O’Kane and his party should come here with a bit of humility and apologise to Scotland’s pensioners for putting us in this position in the first place.

Presiding Officer, please forgive me if I am slightly misquoting Mr O’Kane, but he said, “We have always said”. With the greatest respect, I note that Labour has said a lot of things at a UK level and a Scottish Government level since the chancellor made the announcement. Most particularly, there have been two votes on the matter—one in the UK Parliament and one in the Scottish Parliament—and every Labour member was whipped to vote against Scotland’s pensioners. I am proud that the Scottish Government is, once again, stepping up to defend Scotland’s pensioners, and we will continue to do that. It is a shame that Scottish Labour has not done the same.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

Labour promised to lower energy bills but, instead, the energy price cap has risen twice, with total inaction from the UK Government. Labour cut the provision to 900,000 Scottish pensioners. Does the cabinet secretary agree that mitigating bad decisions cannot go on indefinitely and that it would be much better if powers over decisions on the regulation of energy were held here in our own independent Parliament? [ Interruption .]

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I hear groans from Scottish Conservative and Scottish Labour members as we talk about the fact that we continue to mitigate. That says a lot about where the debate is at the moment.

I share the member’s frustration that we are, once again, talking about mitigation. As I said in my statement, we are already spending £134 million in this financial year to mitigate some of the worst excesses of UK Government policies. Not only is the fact that we are having to do that again deeply disappointing, but it is a deeply expensive way to try to protect people. If only this Parliament had the ability to make more such decisions without being shackled to Westminster spending decisions, we could do so much more. Until that day comes, however, we will continue to do what we can to protect pensioners, those on low incomes and, indeed, everyone else who relies on social security, which is an investment in our people.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

Will the cabinet secretary confirm that the block grant adjustment for the household support fund is £41 million, so the Scottish Government will not be spending any more money out of its own pocket this year? Will she also confirm that no more money will go directly into people’s pockets in this financial year? [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Government has to look carefully at how quickly we can provide support to people. As I said in my statement, that is particularly important when the UK Government gives no forewarning of such decisions. The quickest way that we can do that is to use something such as the Scottish welfare fund, which is an established practice that we have used to assist people in the past—for example, during Covid. That is an important way in which we can assist people with an immediate crisis. As I mentioned, we are doing more to help in a systemic way, too.

I note again that, with the budget on the way just next week, Jeremy Balfour seems to say in his questioning that he wants to spend more at the same time as those on his front bench want the Government to make tax cuts. I am afraid that that does not make economic sense.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

The cabinet secretary’s statement will come as a relief to pensioners and low-income households in my Greenock and Inverclyde constituency and across Scotland, who face financial uncertainty this winter as a result of brutal Labour UK Government cuts. That said, does the cabinet secretary share my frustration that such significant Scottish Government resources must, once again, be directed towards mitigating Westminster austerity measures such as the winter fuel payment cut, the benefit cap and the bedroom tax, despite Keir Starmer’s promise of change?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Stuart McMillan is quite right to point out not just the need for mitigation but its financial cost. He pointed to the work to mitigate the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. That is the decision that we have taken, and I believe that it is the right one, as is our decision to mitigate, again, today.

However, that money could be spent in a variety of different ways, such as on anti-poverty measures, education or the national health service. As we look to the budget next week, the fact that the Scottish Government has had to continue to mitigate—first under the Conservatives and now under Labour—requires us to make difficult decisions in other portfolios. We take that responsibility seriously and, as a member of a minority Government, I hope that the other parties in the Parliament will rise to their responsibility and ensure that a budget is passed next week, so that we can continue to support people in difficult times over the winter.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

More than half of older people in Scotland live in homes that have poor levels of energy efficiency, with an energy performance certificate rating of D or below, at a time when, under this Government, fuel poverty among those in later life is at a record level. Why is there such low awareness of the Government’s energy efficiency schemes? According to the Chartered Institute of Building, awareness levels among older people are as low as 39 per cent, which means that far too few of them benefit from the schemes that the cabinet secretary has talked about.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

In the past decade, our energy efficiency schemes have supported 150,000 households that were either in or at risk of fuel poverty. Given that Colin Smyth has talked about fuel poverty, I hope that he bears it in mind that one reason for fuel poverty is energy costs. Labour said that it would cut those, yet there are further increases just as Labour is taking money away from pensioners.

We need to ensure that people are aware of the schemes that are available, but I hope that Colin Smyth will join me in support of the announcements that have been made today about further extending investment in the warmer homes Scotland scheme.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Despite Labour’s pre-election promise to slash bills by £300, household energy prices rose by £149 in October and are set to rise again in January. It is vital that we work to make pricing fairer, and I welcome the Scottish Government’s work so far on a social tariff. Will the cabinet secretary say more about how a social tariff might operate and how it would help to lower costs?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Jackie Dunbar is right to point out the important role that a social tariff could play in assisting those who are either in fuel poverty or at risk of fuel poverty. She will be aware of the work that Scottish Government ministers are taking forward on a social tariff, including the working group that has been set up and is meeting. I think that it is due to meet again in December.

Of course, the ability to deliver on that social tariff comes down to the UK Government. If it continues to be determined to take money away from pensioners, I hope that it will at least act on the work that is being progressed in that working group, and deliver on that social tariff.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I welcome the additional investment in the Scottish welfare fund and the warmer homes Scotland scheme. However, temperatures have already plummeted, and people are already being forced beyond the choice between heating their homes and eating. How will the Government ensure that the money will get to those who need it—this year, right now?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Maggie Chapman is right. We not only need to deliver on the funding that we have announced today; we need to ensure that we support Scotland’s councils as they administer the Scottish welfare fund. That is exactly why, as part of the £20 million package, we have recognised that we will need to support councils with the administration costs of doing so. I give Maggie Chapman an assurance that that has been taken account of, so that we can support our councils to get that money out the door as quickly as possible.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Liberal Democrats have opposed the cuts to the winter fuel payment, so we welcome the statement and the change in direction as a step in the right direction, especially given Scotland’s colder climate.

Opposition members are often challenged by Government ministers about where the money should come from for particular policies. That is a fair question to ask. For the sake of clarity, will the cabinet secretary say where the money came from to properly fund this policy?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Mr Rennie is quite right to put that challenge back to me. I have often put that challenge to him in the chamber and elsewhere.

As I mentioned, the budget will be announced next week. The support package that has been announced today was discussed in Cabinet as part of the Scottish Government budget. I ask Mr Rennie to wait just a bit longer, because the announcements on the rest of the Scottish Government budget will be made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government next week.

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

Like many in the chamber, I welcome—[Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Ms Grahame.

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

That was terribly rude.

I welcome the announcement. Unfortunately, this Government is having to put in place more mitigations. As I understand it, there are two categories of pensioners: those who are on pension credit, who will get £200 to £300, depending on whether they are single, their age and so on; and the rest of us—that includes me—who will get £100. However, 40 per cent of those who are entitled to pension credit do not receive it. That is no fault of the Government, because that has been the situation for a very long time. The Department for Work and Pensions has those figures, so I assume that that 40 per cent of pensioners will just receive the £100 payment, which is fine. However, how on earth can we increase pension credit uptake? If we do not do that, some pensioners will be left out in the cold.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Christine Grahame is right to point to the need to encourage the uptake of pension credit. She will be aware that this Government has a benefit uptake strategy—it is the only one in the UK—and we are determined to encourage those who are entitled to benefits to apply for them.

Pension credit is a reserved benefit, so it is not part of the benefit uptake strategy. However, regardless of the fact that it is not our responsibility, we have tried to encourage further uptake of pension credit through Social Security Scotland and other public agencies, and I thank our local authority partners for their work on that, too.

Belatedly, the UK Government is delivering a pension credit uptake strategy, which is welcome, but much more can be done. In the main, the responsibility for the matter lies with the UK Government. However, we continue to play our part, and I am sure that Christine Grahame would remind me often that we should do that.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

I note that the minister has, yet again, sought to turn the issue into a constitutional grievance. Cynically, the SNP would like us to believe—[Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Hoy.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

—that benefit mitigation such as that announced today is necessary only because we remain part of the UK. However, is it not the case that the Scottish Government can offer those benefits only because of the Barnett funding formula? That formula gives her Government £2,200 of additional money to spend on benefits and services for every man, woman and child in Scotland today.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Mr Hoy might wish to reflect on the constitutional aspects of this matter—I certainly do. We disagree on the issue and we will continue to do so. However, we have to agree on the fact that this Government’

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the cabinet secretary.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

—that Opposition party members seem to think that that is okay. I would have hoped that we could all agree on protecting our pensioners or, indeed, the budget that comes to this Parliament. It is sad that Mr Hoy refuses to do so.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Freezing temperatures and significant snowfall in the past week left many households in the Highlands and Islands struggling to meet the cost of heating their homes after yet another energy price rise. Labour promised to slash energy bills, but prices have skyrocketed under Labour. While the Scottish Government works to protect pensioners from the worst of Westminster austerity, the UK Government has failed to act and has instead chosen to cut support. Therefore, does the cabinet secretary agree that the UK Government must follow the example of the SNP Government and take meaningful action to tackle rising bills?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Emma Roddick is quite right to point out that meaningful action is required, and that is exactly what this Government has delivered today. She is also right to point out that the UK Government should do likewise. It is not too late for UK ministers to change their mind, reflect on their poor decision and come back with a universal payment. That would be the right thing to do.

In the questions and answers following today’s statement, we have already had discussion and debate about other aspects of meaningful action that the UK Government can undertake. Whether it involves the social tariff or protecting people from increases in energy costs, that is action that the UK Government must take responsibility for. While it continues to ignore the need for that action, we will get on with the action that we can take, as announced today.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Has the cabinet secretary any advice for constituents who have worked hard all their lives for pension entitlements but do not qualify for pension credits? I very much welcome the announcement of the £100, but it will not go far enough to support elderly and vulnerable people and keep them warm this winter.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I agree with Rachael Hamilton that there is a great deal that could be improved with regard to pension credits. It is a shame that the Conservative Government did not do so when it was in power.

We are keen to ensure that older people and other people can receive advice to assist them on their rights. That is exactly why we make provision for welfare rights advice and fund citizens advice bureaux to provide that.

However, I say again to Rachael Hamilton that she cannot come to the chamber and ask us to spend more money when—unless I am mistaken—next week, we will hear that her party wants us to make tax cuts. She cannot have it both ways.

A96 Corridor Review

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Fiona Hyslop on the publication of the A96 corridor review. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I begin my statement by expressing my sincerest sympathies to the families of anyone who has been killed or injured on our roads. In particular, my thoughts are with the family and friends of those involved in recent incidents, including the fatal accident on the A96 east of Brodie on 11 November.

Road safety remains of paramount importance to the Government, and that is reflected in our ambition to have zero deaths or serious injuries on our roads by 2050, with an interim target to halve the number of people killed or seriously injured on the road by 2030.

The Government is also whole-heartedly committed to improving transport infrastructure in the north and north-east of Scotland, including the A96 corridor. In recent years, we have invested almost £1 billion in delivering many improvements to the strategic road network in that area, including the Aberdeen western peripheral route, the A92/A96 Haudagain improvement, the A96 Fochabers and Mosstodloch bypass and the A96 Inveramsay bridge, among others. In addition, the £3.7 billion A9 dualling programme is moving forward, with the construction contract for the Tomatin to Moy section awarded in July this year. The procurement competition for the Tay crossing to Ballinluig section is continuing, with contract award scheduled for summer 2025.

Members will be aware that the Bute house agreement required that an A96 corridor review be conducted. Although that agreement has ended, MSPs of all parties have continued to call for that review to be published, and today I am fulfilling an obligation to publish the full A96 corridor review for consideration by MSPs and the public.

The corridor review includes extensive and detailed appraisal and assessment work that has been undertaken by Transport Scotland. The extensive review reporting consists of more than 2,000 pages, and it is my intention to invite interested MSPs to a round-table briefing session with me and Transport Scotland officials. I consider it appropriate to provide the public and other stakeholders with ample opportunity to fully consider the findings from the detailed work that Transport Scotland has undertaken before providing their feedback. I note that the review itself contains information on full dualling. The review will therefore be subject to a 12-week consultation on its contents.

The Scottish Government’s current plan is to fully dual the A96 between Inverness and Aberdeen and, as part of that process, Transport Scotland has been undertaking a transparent and evidence-based review of the programme.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am sorry—I would not normally do this—but can you say whether it is in order for the Cabinet Secretary for Transport to deliberately mislead the Parliament? Anyone who has read the review document knows that the Scottish National Party Government is no longer committed to fully dualling the A96. Whatever the cabinet secretary is saying today, it is not the truth, because the document says that the Government is backsliding on its commitment and is not going to fully dual that road.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That is not, strictly speaking, a point of order. The cabinet secretary is in the middle of making her statement. After she—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

She is not telling the truth.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Mr Ross, I ask you to withdraw that remark.