Scottish Parliament, 16 January 2025

321 contributions from 68 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the development of the changing places toilet fund. (S6O-04201)

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

I provided an update to Parliament on the changing places toilet fund during Jeremy Balfour’s members’ business debate on the subject on 11 December. I also provided answers on 6 January to five written parliamentary questions that were submitted by Mr O’Kane on the issue. As I have said previously, I will provide a further update once arrangements have been finalised, and subject to parliamentary approval of the Scottish Government’s budget bill.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I thank the minister for that answer and the previous answers to which she refers.

According to PAMIS—Promoting a More Inclusive Society—when the funding was initially announced in 2021, the average cost of equipment for a changing places toilet ranged from £12,000 to £17,000. The minister will be aware that significant rises in construction costs and the costs of equipment over many years have vastly increased the overall cost of building a changing places toilet.

The Government has caused delays. There has been repeated reprofiling of the fund, which has caused exasperation for disabled people, as the minister has heard and well knows, and it is clear that projects across the country now cost more money and that the fund has been devalued.

Has the Government done any analysis of how many projects it would expect £10 million to fund? How many fewer projects might there be as a result of the delays around the issue?

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

We have done a great deal of work on the issue over a number of years, and I am absolutely delighted to have seen such good progress in Scotland. The number of changing places toilets in Scotland has risen from 25 to 269, which means that Scotland has the highest number of changing places toilets per head in the United Kingdom. That is an increase of almost 30 per cent compared to 2019, when the Scottish Government introduced the new Scottish building regulations, so it is not the case that we have made no progress in relation to that funding.

The member will be aware that we are operating in an extremely challenging financial context. We had to make difficult decisions collectively and flex to respond to changing circumstances. However, on 11 December, I was pleased to be able to confirm that work is on-going to establish the number of projects that we have and how the fund will be distributed and profiled, and the funding will be in place next year.

Ministers’ support for the investment has been solid and steadfast. The best thing that the member can do to ensure that that investment becomes a reality is to vote for the budget.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Changing places toilets make a real difference to disabled people and their families, and we would all like to see further provision of them. Will the minister outline a wee bit more about how the Scottish Government will ensure that the CPT fund is designed to meet the needs of those who need it most?

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

I recognise the level of cross-party interest and support for changing places toilets. During the debate on 11 December, members from every party, including Stephen Kerr, Stuart McMillan and Paul O’Kane, all committed their support for more provision of the facilities.

We are working closely with PAMIS to develop the fund so that it takes account of users’ needs. PAMIS has significant technical expertise and experience of supporting local projects across Scotland. I updated the cross-party group on changing places toilets on 14 November, when I sought initial views on the fund criteria. I would like to continue that engagement and to learn lessons from similar funding schemes. We are able to learn a great deal from what has happened in England. It is clear that the fund will need to be flexible enough to take account of different local circumstances across Scotland.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

What meetings has the minister had with third sector organisations other than PAMIS in the past six months regarding the setting up of the changing places toilet fund?

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

I am afraid that I do not have that information to hand. I can certainly write to the member and let him know what engagement the Government has had on the fund over the past six months.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update regarding the steps that it is taking to tackle child poverty. (S6O-04202)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Eradicating child poverty remains the top priority for the Scottish Government. By the end of June, we will publish an annual progress report detailing action taken across 2024-25. The Scottish budget for 2025-26 outlines how we will continue to drive progress, including through continued investment in our Scottish child payment, early learning and childcare, free bus travel, and the expansion of free school meals. We have also committed to spending £3 million to develop the systems to effectively scrap the impact of the two-child cap in 2026, which the Child Poverty Action Group estimates could lift 15,000 children out of poverty.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. It is clear that the Scottish Government is throwing the full weight of the Scottish budget behind its priority mission to eradicate child poverty. However, in spite of the remarkable work that is under way, it is also evident that, under devolution, Scotland has one hand tied behind its back, while Westminster’s priorities lie elsewhere.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Absolute rubbish.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Can the cabinet secretary outline how much of its devolved budget the Scottish Government anticipates it will have to commit to mitigating regressive United Kingdom Government policies in 2025-26 in relation to tackling child poverty, despite Labour’s promise of change?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I had difficulty hearing some of Jackie Dunbar’s supplementary question, due to a combination of laughter and groans from Labour members—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members!

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Let me explain the details in the Scottish Government budget. I say to Richard Leonard that, under devolution, we plan to spend more than £210 million mitigating regressive UK Labour Government policies—an increase of £56 million since the Conservatives were in power. We are continuing to invest in the Scottish welfare fund and are committing more than £99 million for discretionary housing payments, mitigating the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. Despite Labour’s promise of change, it has delivered deeper austerity, so the Scottish Government will go further: we will mitigate the UK Labour Government’s winter fuel payment cut and deliver the systems to mitigate the Labour two-child cap.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what estimate it has made of the number of children and young people leaving school unable to swim. (S6O-04203)

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

The Scottish Government believes that every child should be given the opportunity to learn to swim. It is a life skill that can save lives. Swimming lessons are not delivered nationally as part of the school curriculum and there is currently no requirement to report a child’s swimming ability, either locally or nationally. As a result, we are unable to provide an estimate of the number of pupils who leave school unable to swim. However, we will continue to work with sportscotland, Scottish Swimming and various local and national partners to develop interventions and approaches to provide opportunities for children to become confident, safer and competent swimmers.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Community access to swimming has been massively reduced through pool closures and cuts to opening hours. Costs are rising for families, too. Not every school has a pool and it is getting harder to go swimming outwith school.

We know from Scottish Swimming that, some time ago, up to 40 per cent of primary school-aged children left school unable to swim. That should be a serious concern for us all, including the Scottish Government. Next week, the Parliament will consider Scottish Swimming’s petition concerning the proposed closure of school pools, including five in Dundee.

Does the minister accept that that all makes it more difficult to ensure that primary school-aged children have the opportunity to learn how to swim and the basics of water safety? What is the Government’s plan to make sure that they can do so?

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

I absolutely recognise the challenges that Neil Bibby has described. I remind members that I live in the Highlands, where children often attend school at a very long distance from their local pool. However, Highland Council is dedicated to ensuring that children can learn to swim at school.

Neil Bibby asked about leisure facilities. We understand the challenging financial circumstances that local authorities are facing in relation to maintaining and operating sports and leisure facilities. That is due, in part, to rising energy costs. We have repeatedly called on the United Kingdom Government to use all the powers at its disposal to tackle the cost of living crisis and to provide appropriate energy bill relief to leisure facilities. Swimming is a very energy-dense activity. It is vital that all avenues are explored to ensure that, where possible, local clubs and communities have access to sport and leisure facilities.

The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and I will continue to work on a cross-portfolio basis to ensure that we maximise the opportunity for children to learn to swim at school.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Swimming is a life skill. This is a safety issue. Swimming is a positive health activity at a time when children’s physical and mental health is worse than it has ever been. If someone cannot swim, they are excluded from participation, which exacerbates inequalities.

As I have continually said, we need to increase opportunities to be active. All primary schools should have access to free swimming lessons. Why does the Scottish Government keep digging its heels in? Surely, it must be running out of excuses by now?

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

Brian Whittle and I are very aligned on the issues around the value of sport and exercise for both physical and mental health. He alluded to the opportunities that arise from swimming for children with disabilities to be included. It is a superb sport for people to get involved in. That is why the Government is so committed to ensuring that opportunities are available for children in schools. As I said, we will continue to work with sportscotland, Scottish Swimming and local authorities, and on a cross-portfolio basis across the Government in order to ensure that we maximise those opportunities.

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

To ask the Scottish Government how its draft budget 2025-26 will support the delivery of drug and alcohol services across Scotland. (S6O-04204)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The total funding proposed for alcohol and drug services, including health board baseline funding, is over £150 million in 2025-26. That includes maintaining £112 million of funding for alcohol and drug partnerships; continuing to fund grass-roots organisations through £13 million of funding via the Corra Foundation; supporting a wide range of activity, including residential rehabilitation; and making £2.3 million available to support the Thistle centre, the safer drug consumption facility.

That adds to our significant investment over the past four years and means that I am confident that we will meet the national mission’s commitment to £250 million of additional funding over five years.

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

During recent engagement with general practitioner practices, tackling alcohol harm was raised as an unrelenting health challenge. They expressed strong support for minimum unit pricing and other measures to tackle alcohol harm. However, they also expressed some concern about a potential shift in the balance away from tackling alcohol harm—a point highlighted in the recent Audit Scotland review of alcohol and drug services. That is not to diminish the urgency of the work to reduce drug harm.

In addition to previously announced efforts, such as a review of the evidence on alcohol marketing, increasing MUP and developing a service specification for alcohol and drug services, what assurance can the cabinet secretary give that the draft Scottish budget will support the action necessary to reduce the level of alcohol-related health and social harms and reduce the number of people who die as a result of alcohol?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I want to reassure Audrey Nicoll and other colleagues across the Parliament that we remain committed to and focused on tackling both issues. We remain committed to tackling alcohol-related harm on an equal footing with harm caused by drugs. Our forecast spend in 2025-26 of more than £150 million is for both alcohol and drug services, and our substantial investment supports services that are often delivered in tandem at the front line.

In addition, national mission initiatives have made improvements in treatment for alcohol as well as drugs. For example, our substantial investment in residential rehabilitation is benefiting people with both alcohol and drug dependency. Moreover, the forthcoming alcohol treatment guidelines will provide support for alcohol treatment that is similar to the medication-assisted treatment standard for drugs.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

The Audit Scotland report that was published towards the end of last year states, in its findings, that the

“Government’s increased focus on drug harm through its National Mission programme is shifting the balance of attention from, and effort on, tackling alcohol harm.”

The Government has said that this is a twin public health emergency, and we accept that. However, sometimes the Government tends to set out a semi-complete list of disjointed actions relating to alcohol harm prevention. We need clearer actions and more urgency. Through its 2025-26 budget, is the Scottish Government considering ring fencing funding for improving access to alcohol treatment services?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I will continue to work with alcohol and drug partnerships to ensure that, as Carol Mochan asks, the services are available to provide support for addressing both alcohol and drug use.

We are also taking action this year with Public Health Scotland to provide an evidence-based picture of what further preventative actions we can take on alcohol advertising. When the report comes back from Public Health Scotland, we will consider what further preventative measures we can take on that.

Through the interventions that we are making with alcohol and drug partnerships, the work that we are doing on minimum unit pricing and the work that we are doing to reduce the impact that alcohol advertising has, we are taking as many steps as possible. If Carol Mochan wishes to suggest further work, I am more than happy to engage with her on that.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government when it last discussed plans to reduce delayed discharge with NHS Dumfries and Galloway. (S6O-04205)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The collaborative response and assurance group that I chair jointly with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has met weekly with leaders from across the health and social care system, including from Dumfries and Galloway, since last June. Our most recent meeting was on Monday. We have been working to understand the challenges faced by areas with high levels of delay, including Dumfries and Galloway, and to support them to deliver the changes that will improve people’s journey from hospital to home or the care setting that is right for them.

Our planned budget for 2025-26 will invest a further £200 million to reduce waiting list backlogs, improve capacity and remove the barriers that keep some patients in hospital longer than is necessary.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

A decade ago, the Scottish Government promised to eradicate delayed discharges. Since then, 193,000 bed days have been lost to delayed discharge in NHS Dumfries and Galloway, and the latest figures show that that number is rising yet again. It is no wonder that, today, the Royal College of Nursing published devastating testimony of nurses who are having to care for patients on trolleys because there are no spare hospital beds. When will the Government finally deliver on its promise to eradicate delayed discharge, or is that just another broken Scottish National Party health promise?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I will address two elements of that situation.

First, the intervention that we seek to take in the budget is intended directly to address the issues that we face with scheduled care or waiting lists and to address the flow through the system by providing capacity in social care and primary care in order to reduce hospital occupancy and length of stay. Where we have worked with local systems in the health service and social care to reduce length of stay and hospital occupancy and to address pre-delay discharge from hospital, that has been successful, and that is the basis on which we will continue to intervene. I encourage Colin Smyth to support the finance that is being provided to ensure that that can happen through the budget interventions.

Of course, I regret the situation that was raised in the Royal College of Nursing’s report. I addressed that on “Good Morning Scotland” this morning. We obviously wish to avoid that situation, not only for patients but for staff, and to ensure that we have a system that meets the needs of both groups.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on farmers giving the methane-reducing feed additive Bovaer to their cattle. (S6O-04206)

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

Bovaer is a methane-suppressing feed product that has undergone a safety assessment by the Food Standards Agency and Food Standards Scotland as a feed additive for all ruminants involved in milk production and reproduction. It was authorised for use in Scotland in December 2023. Parallel regulations authorise Bovaer across Great Britain. That approval means that farmers in Scotland can use the additive if they choose to do so.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

As the minister is aware, Bovaer is manufactured at DSM-Firmenich’s plant, near my Dalry constituency office. Despite more than 58 studies on the product and its having been evaluated as being completely safe to use, Bovaer has been the focus of significant online misinformation. Studies also show no safety concerns for workers who handle the additive.

Does the minister agree that science, not social media, should govern our approach to food safety and that Bovaer, which is now routinely used across Europe, Australia and North America, has an important role to play in combating climate change?

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

I agree with that understanding of our climate change. Kenneth Gibson makes an important point. Social media has been great for many things but, occasionally, it throws up misinformation that overtakes the reality of the conversations and reasoned discussions that we need to have about the measures that we will take to tackle the challenges that we face. Research suggests that the appropriate use of methane-suppressing feed products—or MSFPs—such as Bovaer in livestock diets more generally plays an important role in helping us to reduce emissions from livestock production.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I regret that we will not be able to take any further questions in this item. I remind members of the expectations regarding the length of questions and responses, because more concise questions and responses enable more members to participate.

That concludes general questions.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Today, Scotland’s nurses have spoken. A damning report from the Royal College of Nursing lays bare our broken national health service. First-hand accounts from more than 500 Scottish nurses reveal a lack of dignity and privacy for patients who are stuck in corridors and side rooms. They describe scenes of chaos, patient safety being compromised due to a shortage of beds and a dangerous lack of medication and oxygen. It is page after page of shocking and desperate testimony.

One nurse said:

“It is degrading, undignified, and at times unsafe for patients who are already angry due to the long waits, sometimes waiting in”

emergency departments

“for over 35 hours to go to a ward, just to be put in the corridor. The system is broken.”

Does John Swinney agree with Scotland’s nurses that Scotland’s NHS is broken?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The first thing that I want to do is to apologise to any individual who has had an unsatisfactory experience with the care that they have received and with the congestion in hospitals.

I commend, as I did last week, NHS staff for their unremitting commitment to ensuring that the system is able to deliver as best it can in the face of unprecedented demand. I recounted to the Parliament last week the enormity of the increase in flu cases that have been wrestled with in the NHS over the past few weeks.

The Government is entirely focused on ensuring that we meet the needs of patients and that we support staff in undertaking the essential work that they do, given the enormous increase in demand that we have faced in recent weeks.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Although apologies are welcome, as is commending staff, change is required. The report confirms that hospital overcrowding is at dangerous levels, with one nurse saying:

“I work in what is supposed to be a 32 bed ... assessment unit, recently we have had ... between 60-70 patients at any one time.”

We know the root cause of that: it is due to record levels of delayed discharge, which the Scottish National Party Government promised to eradicate 10 years ago.

However, SNP ministers now do not even seem to accept reality. This morning, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care denied that patients were regularly treated in corridors. In response, Colin Poolman of the Royal College of Nursing Scotland disagreed, saying that that has now been “normalised”. Who is right—Scotland’s nurses or the SNP health secretary?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The health secretary and I are fully aware of the prevailing circumstances in our hospital system just now. The health secretary has seen it with his own eyes during the visits that he has undertaken, and I saw it when I spent the evening of 4 January in the emergency department of Edinburgh royal infirmary, where I observed the enormous commitment of staff in the face of unprecedented demand.

I remind the Parliament that the level of flu cases that we have been experiencing and the level of hospital admissions are the highest that they have been since records began in 2010; they are formidably higher than the demand that we faced last winter. There is unprecedented demand in the system, and I commend health service staff for managing through these difficult experiences.

The measures that the Government has put in place to tackle delayed discharge, to ensure that we have better flow navigation in our hospitals and to ensure that same-day treatment services are available are some of the actions that the health secretary has taken to address the situation.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The fact that the health secretary has seen it with his own eyes but continues to deny it is absolutely damning. It illustrates a stark disconnect between what SNP politicians think about the NHS and the reality of what nurses are saying.

Here is a reality check. Some nurses are being forced to quit in desperation and disgust. A nurse with 10 years’ service said:

“People are dying as a result of ambulances being held at hospitals”.

Another said:

“It’s disgusting and we are on our knees but nothing seems to be getting done.”

Another said:

“It breaks my heart at the pathetic care that we are able to give.”

The situation cannot continue. It is absolutely heartbreaking. When will the Government bring forward a serious plan to fix Scotland’s NHS?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I assure the Parliament that, despite the enormous increase in flu cases that we have seen, with that figure increasing to the highest level on record, a reduction in the number of flu cases is now prevailing in the NHS.

I also want to assure patients of the steps that the Government has taken to ensure that we have the support in place to address the demand that exists, which, as I said in my earlier answer, comes from the same-day emergency care services, the provision of flow navigation centres, the provision of frailty units in hospitals and the development of the hospital at home system, which has significantly enhanced our ability to care for patients and to ensure that individuals are supported in the right context and in the right circumstances.

Mr Findlay asked me about reforms. Reforms were undertaken in the redesign of urgent care programme in December 2020. The independent evaluation of that programme has demonstrated that the patient experience is that the redesign of urgent care has resulted in shorter waits for many patients, as a consequence of the expansion of emergency care that we have put in place—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—and the expansion of NHS 24 services, which was a key recommendation of the redesign of urgent care programme.

What has helped us in this incredibly difficult period has been the fact that members of the public have followed the advice that the Government has issued, which is to secure the right care in the right place. That has reduced the level of demand that is prevalent in some emergency settings and has enabled us to provide the support that individuals require. That is what we have to do to navigate through periods of increased demand, such as the one that we have just experienced.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I really do not know where to begin with that answer. To say that what is in the RCN report is to do with the fact that it covers a period in which we faced a flu epidemic, rather than inaction, is absolutely preposterous.

Patients expect and deserve dignity and decency from the NHS, but nurses say that they cannot provide the treatment that is needed. I would like the First Minister to please listen to what nurses are saying. I have read the report, and I encourage him to do so. One nurse describes being

“disgusted and ashamed that this was the best we could offer a 91 year old lady.”

Another describes being “embarrassed and ashamed” at leaving a 100-year-old woman on a trolley in discomfort.

Another said:

“We are putting Scottish Government targets before patients and it needs to stop.”

What does John Swinney have to say to the nurses who are being let down and to the patients who are having to suffer such disgusting and degrading treatment?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I cited the flu rates because they were at their peak during the period in which the RCN survey was undertaken, which put the greatest burden on emergency care in the national health service. The evidence that I have put to the Parliament is directly related to the questions that Mr Findlay has put to me.

I accept and acknowledge the enormity of the pressure on the NHS. I have been completely candid with the Parliament about that over a number of weeks. As a consequence, we have been leading a process of supporting our territorial boards and the Scottish Ambulance Service. I know from the review call that I chaired last night that there has been a significant improvement in the delivery of healthcare in emergency situations as a consequence of the reduction in the number of flu cases that I have mentioned. I am grateful to members of the public for their co-operation in ensuring that they secure the right care in the right place, and I am profoundly grateful to staff for working so hard during an incredibly difficult and demanding period.

Mr Findlay asks what the public can expect of the Government. What the public can expect from me, as First Minister, is my unrelenting focus, working with the health secretary, on ensuring that we deliver the improvements and developments that will ensure that patients get the care that they require and that they are supported in receiving the care that is necessary to address their health circumstances at all times.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Last week, I raised the case of Robert, a retired policeman from Lanarkshire, who spent five and a half hours on the floor in accident and emergency before being given morphine and a bed. The First Minister apologised but, as usual, he then used hard-working national health service staff as his political shield.

Today, the Royal College of Nursing has published a damning report that lays bare the impact that the crisis has on NHS patients and staff. One nurse said:

“I deliver care in inappropriate settings every single day all day. It deprives the patient of privacy and dignity, it forces us to go against our codes and training.”

That is shameful. Last week, John Swinney apologised to patients, and he has just done that again today. Will he now apologise to the NHS staff that he and his Scottish National Party Government are failing every day?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

One key point that I have tried to stress in all my answers to Parliament on this question is the importance of ensuring that I address as they are the circumstances that we face in our hospital system. That is one reason why I went to the emergency department at Edinburgh royal infirmary on 4 January to see with my own eyes the pressure that was being recounted to me by health service leaders over a number of weeks when I was engaged in trying to address the situation.

I think that, throughout the United Kingdom, ministers all accept the pressures that are on the national health service because of winter circumstances. I have recounted to Parliament the enormous increase in flu cases and I will put those numbers on the parliamentary record. Hospital admissions almost doubled from 708 in the week ending 15 December to 1,382 in the week ending 22 December, and they increased further to 1,596 in the week ending 29 December, which is when the RCN survey was undertaken.

I acknowledge the reality of the pressures—the intense pressures—on the national health service. We have increased staff and consultant numbers and have expanded the capacity of NHS 24, as a review of urgent care called on us to do back in 2020. The Government will continue taking all the necessary steps to ensure that our staff are as well supported as they can be in dealing with the intense pressures that prevail within the national health service in winter.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

John Swinney wants to pretend that we have only a winter crisis in the NHS; the reality is that we have a permanent crisis in the NHS on John Swinney’s watch.

The RCN report details the human cost of John Swinney and Neil Gray’s incompetence. Nurses are delivering care in overcrowded or unsuitable places such as corridors, cupboards and even car parks every day. Staff are caring for multiple patients in a single corridor, where they are unable to access oxygen, cardiac monitors and other life-saving equipment. Patients are going into cardiac arrest while in corridors, incontinent patients are left with no privacy and almost 90 per cent of nurses say that patient safety is being compromised. Nurses describe flu patients waiting in corridors next to vulnerable patients and having to discuss miscarriages with couples in overcrowded corridors.

One nurse said:

“I worked throughout Covid-19 and although was a horrendous experience this lack of care in the broken system is worse.”

Is that not the deadly reality of the NHS on John Swinney and the SNP’s watch?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

No, it is not. What we are doing is focusing, within the resources available to us, on maximising the effectiveness of patient care for individuals.

What has the Government done in recent years? The Government has, for example, increased NHS staffing by 26.6 per cent during the period in which we have been in office. Regarding the central point in Mr Sarwar’s last question, the Government has increased staffing numbers. We have increased consultant numbers, particularly in emergency care, and we have also increased the capacity of NHS 24. We have introduced innovations, such as hospital at home, to ensure that more patients are treated in the circumstances that best meet their needs.

The Government will continue to innovate and reform to address the public’s needs, but there is a harsh reality about the increased demand that we are facing as a consequence of the upsurge in flu cases and the implications of Covid, which has left the population facing more acute health circumstances than pre-Covid. The Government is prioritising the national health service by ensuring that we are investing the largest sum of money ever in it. I look forward to the Government’s budget passing to enable us to secure that investment for the people of this country.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The RCN in Scotland said this morning that this is

“a wake-up call for the Scottish Government”,

but it is clear from John Swinney’s answers that he is asleep at the wheel, which is why we need a change of direction in this country. He denies reality, so will he listen to what Scottish nurses are saying? One said:

“It is demoralising, frustrating and embarrassing. It feels like patients are a number not a patient.”

Another Scottish nurse said:

“It’s degrading and unsafe as these locations are not designed or intended for patient care and offer little or no privacy.”

Another Scottish nurse said:

“I have had to give IV antibiotics on a chair beside the nurses station to someone septic.”

Another Scottish nurse said:

“I am now in the process of leaving the NHS ... it is fraying at the seams and has left me with mental health problems and trauma.”

That is the damning and sad reality of our NHS under the SNP. Is it not a clear sign that John Swinney and this SNP Government cannot fix the mess that they made, and that we need a new direction in our country?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I hear the slogan from Anas Sarwar every week, but I point out to Parliament that there was not a single word of substance to back up his rhetoric about a new direction. The last word that Anas Sarwar used was “change”. He has argued that a Labour Government in London would change the circumstances for people in this country. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members, let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

A Labour Government did not change the circumstances for the WASPI women—women against state pension inequality—in this country, who have been betrayed by the Labour Party in the United Kingdom. When the Secretary of State for Scotland was in Parliament yesterday, he told us that the people could not cope with the honesty of the Labour Government. I think that, on the basis of the past few months, people in Scotland are waking up to the fundamental dishonesty of the Labour Party, and Mr Sarwar epitomises it.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Presiding Officer—[Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Lorna Slater.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Presiding Officer, 2024 was the hottest year on record. We are seeing the climate break down in front of our eyes in devastating floods and raging wildfires. This is just the start now that planet earth has crossed the threshold of 1.5°C of global heating. The promises that were made in the Paris agreement have proven worthless, and global leaders have failed to protect our planet. Is Scotland’s First Minister prepared to take serious action on land use change; on reducing traffic by introducing road charges and cutting the cost of public transport; and on making homes warmer, greener and cheaper to heat, so that we can get back on track to meet our climate targets?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am certainly committed to ensuring that we take action on the climate. I want to make sure that we fulfil the obligations that Parliament has put into statute, and that we take the practical actions to ensure that that can be the case.

The Government has a number of policy measures in place that will assist us in that work, and Parliament knows and understands what they are. Some of them involve investment that is tied up with the Government’s budget, which involves, for example, £300 million for the heat in buildings programme and investment of nearly £200 million in a range of active and sustainable transport measures.

The Government is committed to the policy agenda of taking action on the climate, in addition to the steps that we are taking on renewable energy. We are also taking the practical financial steps to ensure that that programme is in place to support those policy interventions.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

We have a duty to future generations not to let global heating spiral out of control. Existing oil and gas production must wind down as we transition to renewable energy, and new oil and gas exploration is not compatible with Scotland’s climate commitments.

The last time that the First Minister was asked about Scotland’s energy strategy, he said that the reason for further delay was recent court decisions blocking oil and gas projects on environmental grounds. However, those decisions would worry him only if he intended to support new oil and gas projects in Scotland. Will he confirm the presumption against new oil and gas in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government has obligations to ensure that all our policy interventions are well evidenced and to take into account all the circumstances that we face. The court cases that I cited are relevant because they fundamentally affect decision making and policy approaches in relation to consent to any oil and gas developments. It is important that the Government takes time to understand all those issues and engage with the UK Government, which is the decision-making body on those questions.

I say to Parliament that the Government is absolutely committed to our agenda on climate action. We have binding statutory targets, and I want Scotland to achieve those targets, because I want us to play our part in protecting the planet. I accept fundamentally the point that Lorna Slater put to me, which is that those issues are in jeopardy because of the temperature of the planet last year. I want to ensure that Scotland plays its part in addressing that.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the potential economic impact of Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners’ reported £800 million investment in battery energy storage sites in Scotland. (S6F-03720)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I welcome investment in the construction of the two largest battery storage systems in Europe, in South Lanarkshire and in Fife. The construction and long-term maintenance of those projects will bring jobs and economic value locally and to wider Scotland. Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners has stated that there will be 150 staff working at Coalburn 1 during peak construction. That investment and show of confidence in Scotland will also contribute indirectly to local employment. It is a landmark announcement for our economic and net zero prospects.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Given recent reports about energy storage and security, the development of the Coalburn battery energy storage site will be a vital addition to our national energy security mix, as well as a welcome investment in the growth of Scotland’s energy transition infrastructure. It is also essential that the local community benefits from that significant investment. It is unfortunate that the Labour Government in the United Kingdom has failed to keep its promise to bring bills down. Can the First Minister say any more about how the development will boost the region, such as through job creation, including in the renewable supply chain?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is a significant investment, and it demonstrates Scotland’s openness to attracting international investment as part of our journey to net zero. The battery storage facilities will create local employment. They will also be integral to delivering a sustainable power network for Scotland and will enable us to withstand some of the changes in demand in the power network.

When fully functional, the two sites will provide an incredible 1.5GW of power, which is sufficient to cover the energy needs of more than 4.5 million households for a two-hour period. That demonstrates the scale and capacity of the investment that has been made in Scotland as a result of the Government’s policy approach.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I welcome the investment at Coalburn in South Lanarkshire, but in the light of the announcement yesterday by the National Energy System Operator of a pause in the applications process for new entrants to the connections queue—because there are far more of them than there is demand—does the First Minister agree that there should be a national strategy for energy storage in Scotland that matches approval by the Scottish Government’s energy consents unit for battery storage sites with actual demand and with where there is community buy-in?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Simpson raises some interesting points, but we have to be mindful of the economic opportunities that arise out of energy production.

Energy production will be a significant economic asset for Scotland in the years to come, in just the same way that energy production has been a significant economic asset for Scotland until now. The difference, looking forward, is that I want to make sure that Scotland benefits from that energy strategy and policy. We did not benefit from the previous energy opportunity that we had in Scotland; I want to make sure that we benefit from the next one.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the First Minister, in light of the rise in the number of people under 50 being diagnosed with bowel cancer, what proposals the Scottish Government has to extend the national bowel screening programme to those under 50 years old. (S6F-03699)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I thank Edward Mountain for raising this important issue and for the commendable commitment and leadership that he has shown on the issue inside and outside Parliament.

The Scottish Government, along with the rest of the United Kingdom, follows advice about screening programmes from the United Kingdom National Screening Committee, which is an independent expert advisory group. Scotland has fully adopted the National Screening Committee’s recommendation to invite everyone aged between 50 and 74 for bowel screening every two years. The recommendation was based on a thorough assessment of the risks and benefits of screening people at different ages. I assure Parliament that if the National Screening Committee recommended a lower age range, we would explore, as a matter of urgency, how that could be taken forward in Scotland.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I am proud that our national health service in Scotland and this Government have led the way in bowel screening since 2017. I am personally grateful for that. However, it is clear that, with the increasing number of young people getting bowel cancer, we need to do more work. One of the most cost-effective ways to do that is not necessarily to increase screening. Rather, it is to ensure that GPs are aware of the problem and refer people for further tests at the first sign that they may have bowel cancer. I probably agree with the First Minister on that.

Where I disagree, and where Bowel Cancer disagrees, relates to greater sensitivity in our screening programme. I have been pushing for that, but I have been told that there is a lack of capacity in colonoscopies to allow it to happen. The result is that that ignores the real costs of bowel cancer treatment, which could include radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery, all of which have a huge cost. Will the Government commit to carrying out a cost benefit analysis of increasing the sensitivity of bowel screening, in line with the National Screening Committee’s recommendation, to ensure that Scotland continues to lead the way in bowel cancer screening, as we should?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I thank Mr Mountain for his commendation of the steps that the Government is taking on bowel screening. The bowel screening programme is an excellent programme. It is very convenient for members of the public and it is very efficient. It is also very important for the management of individuals’ health. I am grateful for Mr Mountain’s comments in that respect.

I will consider all the points that Mr Mountain has put to me about the bowel screening programme and will ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to advise me on those points. It is important that we take all practical steps to act in accordance with the clinical advice that is available to us. Mr Mountain and I are probably in the same place on respecting that clinical advice, but if there are specific mechanisms that we can deploy that will make a difference, I will be happy to consider them.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

It is welcome that, a number of years ago, Scotland—ahead of parts of the UK—fully adopted the UK National Screening Committee’s recommendation to screen all individuals between the ages of 50 and 74. Will the First Minister advise how the Scottish Government will continue to invest in screening services, alongside endoscopy and urology services, to support patients across Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is principally taken forward through our endoscopy and urology diagnostic recovery and renewal plan, which is supported by £70 million-worth of investment. It is focused on bolstering endoscopy capacity through the recruitment of additional endoscopists. We have established a network of hubs to support us in that rapid access to diagnostic services. The points that Mr Torrance raises are important in enhancing the effectiveness of the services that we have available to us.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

This week is less survivable cancers awareness week. Sixty-one per cent of people in Scotland who are diagnosed with less survivable cancers—that is, lung, liver, brain, oesophagus, pancreatic and stomach cancers—will die from their disease within one year. In common with bowel cancer cases, early diagnosis and treatment are key to improving survival rates for such patients. Although the cancer strategy is welcome, we need action to be taken more quickly if we are to save lives. What more will the First Minister do to improve early diagnosis of the cancers that I have mentioned, and to drive better outcomes for patients?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Jackie Baillie has raised an important issue. I reassure her that the Government is absolutely committed to that endeavour. We are treating more cancer patients on time, within both standards, than we did 10 years ago: 12 per cent more within the 31-day standard and 6 per cent more within the 62-day standard. The median wait for treatment within the 31-day standard is just four days. Ms Baillie’s point about rapidity is absolutely well made, and the Government is working hard to deliver that aim.

My principal answer to Jackie Baillie is that our focus is on developing rapid cancer diagnostic services, which are critical to ensuring that the earliest possible action and intervention happen to address the circumstances that she has put to me. That will remain the focus of the Government’s intervention in that area of policy.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is responding to reports that 182 sexual assaults, including rapes, have taken place in hospitals in the last five years. (S6F-03721)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Assaults on patients or staff are absolutely abhorrent and cannot be tolerated. Everyone has the right to access healthcare or their place of work without fear of verbal or physical abuse. All instances of violent behaviour, including sexual assaults, are against the law and should be immediately reported to the police and dealt with by the justice system appropriately.

The NHS Scotland charter of patient rights and responsibilities makes clear to patients that they

“may face legal action if”

they are

“abusive, violent or aggressive towards NHS staff”

or members of the public

“when using NHS services.”

The NHS Scotland bullying and harassment workforce policy provides a means of addressing unresolved, significant or persistent sexual harassment and misconduct.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The figures are shocking. Hospital patients are often vulnerable and exposed, and they and their families must be confident that they are safe. As the First Minister has said, the perpetrators of sexual assault and rape must be held to account. However, there are serious questions about how the national health service responds to such crimes and about its safeguarding procedures to prevent opportunities for them to occur.

The situation that is described in this morning’s report from the Royal College of Nursing, which mentions patients having to be treated in corridors, is not only a symptom of the NHS being overstretched; it leaves people in vulnerable situations. How does the Scottish Government ensure that robust safeguarding is in place, that the NHS takes sexual assaults in hospitals seriously, and that patients will be safe when they are in hospital?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

On whether such issues are taken seriously, I hope that what I have said already reassures Claire Baker that, in all circumstances and in all aspects of our public services, any question of sexual assault or any form of sexual misconduct must be addressed by public authorities. They have statutory and legal obligations to do so, and I expect them to do that. We will reinforce that message in light of the point that Claire Baker has put to me.

As part of our approach to the patient safety programme, we must ensure that patients are safe at all times when they are in the care of the NHS. That includes ensuring that appropriate safeguarding is in place in all circumstances. It is the duty of all health boards to ensure that that is the case, and we will remind them of that obligation.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

In the past five years, seven sexual assaults and two rapes have taken place at Carseview psychiatric unit in Dundee. Given the level of underreporting, those may be just the tip of the iceberg. I have heard horrendous accounts about how frightening it is to be a female patient at Carseview. The facilities there are often terrifying for patients, who are at their most vulnerable, especially as they include mixed-sex wards. That is not just me saying so; the Strang report agrees. Will the First Minister instruct his Government to stop the use of such wards in NHS hospitals and secure psychiatric settings, starting with those at Carseview?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As Tess White will know, work is under way to strengthen the approach to patient care at Carseview. As she has cited, that work was identified and taken forward by David Strang in his report. It has been pursued by NHS Tayside, and the effectiveness of that is being assessed regularly.

In relation to the question of single-sex wards, the NHS estate has to be managed carefully to make sure that appropriate safety is in place for individuals at all times. That principle should be applied to the care of patients at Carseview and in any other hospital setting.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency and general supplementaries.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Yesterday, the Scottish National Investment Bank announced a welcome £20 million investment into XLCC, the company that is developing the United Kingdom’s first high-voltage direct current cable manufacturing facility, at Hunterston in my constituency. That £1.4 billion-plus project will create 900 highly skilled jobs and will position Scotland as a global leader in HVDC technology. Does the First Minister agree that that is a first-class opportunity for Scotland to help to drive net zero innovation? What will his Government do to ensure that that project and similar projects secure the support needed to thrive?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I very much welcome the announcement that has been made by XLCC in relation to the facility at Hunterston. That is an example of exactly what we envisaged with the Scottish National Investment Bank—that it would provide the opportunity for investment through that mechanism to support private sector investment and leverage much more significant volumes of private sector investment into the Scottish economy. The funding model is working, which helps us in taking forward our net zero ambitions.

I am delighted that Mr Gibson’s constituency has benefited in the way that he has recounted to Parliament. It is important from the Government’s point of view that the Scottish National Investment Bank is actively engaged in supporting investments as part of our transition to net zero.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

I was contacted this week by a constituent in Prestwick. He attended an appointment with his general practitioner on 30 December with a lesion on his back suspected to be skin cancer. His GP made an urgent referral to dermatology. Having twice been diagnosed with skin cancer, he knows that it demands urgent attention. Despite that, he was told that it would be

“over 12 months before he could be seen at hospital, despite the referral being marked urgent.”

For someone with suspected cancer, 12 months could be the difference between life and death. Does the First Minister think that that is an acceptable timescale? What action will the Scottish Government take to ensure that urgent cancer referrals such as that are seen within appropriate and safe timeframes?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If a clinician believes that a case is urgent, that priority should be reflected in the national health service. I do not know the details of the case that Sharon Dowey puts to me, but if she cares to provide us with the details, we will investigate the issues that she raises.

As I said in my answer to Jackie Baillie, urgent intervention on cancer-related cases is absolutely critical to ensuring that individuals have the best outcomes possible. If Sharon Dowey would care to provide me with the details, I will have those looked into today.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

Last week, I led a members’ business debate on diabetes technology, in which I highlighted that Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network guideline 170, which gives people with type 1 diabetes a choice in technology to manage their condition, is not being fully followed in all health boards. In her speech, the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health stated that children are being given a choice, but she failed to mention adults. Does the First Minister agree that health guidelines should be followed, including for adults with type 1 diabetes?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The guidelines are there for a purpose, which is to provide advice to clinicians and assurance to patients about how individuals should be treated. There will, of course, be challenges in the delivery of those services within the resources that we have available to us, but the SIGN guidelines are there for a purpose, and I encourage health boards to follow those in all circumstances.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

Yesterday, the Secretary of State for Scotland, Ian Murray, claimed that the Scottish National Party Government had not yet asked for Department for Work and Pensions data to end the two-child cap. However, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice wrote to the DWP and the Secretary of State for Scotland on the issue last month. Can the First Minister offer the Secretary of State for Scotland any advice on how to keep up with his inbox and support tackling child poverty in Scotland?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The First Minister should address matters for which he has general responsibility.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is important that accurate information is given to the public about the measures that are being taken forward on the Government’s policy agenda. On 16 December, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice wrote to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, copying in the Secretary of State for Scotland, to specify the data sharing requirements. Those included:

“• Data for all children attached to the Universal Credit claim, including date of birth.

• Data for which children on the Universal Credit claim are included in the UC payment.

• Data for all children who are paid under the Universal Credit exemptions rules including the exemption reason.

• Central Payment System benefit code.

• All data already shared by DWP for the purposes of administering Scottish Child Payment but expanded to include children up to age 19 years old ...

• Data on the UC payment cycles for the claims.”

I was assured by the Prime Minister, face to face, that the DWP would work collaboratively with us to take forward the policy. It is not helpful, and it is not representative, for the Secretary of State for Scotland to make the comments that he made yesterday. If we are going to have an improved climate of relations between the Scottish and the United Kingdom Governments, the UK Government better keep its side of the bargain.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am sure that the First Minister is aware of the surprise announcement by Lloyds Banking Group concerning the closure in 2026 of its base in Dunfermline, which currently employs 1,500 people. Although I am relieved to hear that the intention is that there will be limited job losses, with workers either relocating to Edinburgh or working remotely, the impact of the announcement on the local community has been vast, and the potential extra costs for staff members remain deeply concerning. What engagement has the Scottish Government had with Lloyds Banking Group on its surprise decision? Will the First Minister work to ensure that any impact of the move will be minimal for employees and people who live in the area?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Those are matters for Lloyds Banking Group to determine. The Government engages actively with it, and I suspect that the issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the financial services growth and development board, which is co-chaired by the Scottish Government. We will certainly do all that we can to ensure that there is no loss of employment and that the individuals who are affected are not inconvenienced as a consequence of the decision that Lloyds Banking Group has taken.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

Thirty million United Kingdom homes are heated by gas, and half of the gas that we need is imported. The less gas we produce here, the more we will rely on the USA for fracked gas. Does the First Minister agree that, like Norway, and as Russell Borthwick of the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce has urged, we must resume exploration of oil and gas, otherwise we will only be providing a further boost to the fracking industry that is so beloved of the President-elect, Donald Trump?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is important that we undertake the transition to net zero that society must undertake, because, as we have already discussed in the Parliament, all the evidence is that there will be catastrophic circumstances if we do not address the use of fossil fuels within our economy. The Government has a managed approach to that policy objective, which is about ensuring that we have a just transition and invest in our renewable energy technology. I am confident that Scotland will have the energy generation capacity that we need to meet the challenges of the future. We must work with the industry on a just transition strategy, which is what the Government is doing.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

My constituency was one of the areas most severely hit in the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. My brother and I were directly affected because our farm was only a stone’s throw away from one of the first farms in Scotland that was affected, and it came under movement restrictions for months.

The economic cost was not the only long-term legacy; emotional scars are still deeply felt across the rural communities that I represent. I vividly remember the heart-wrenching calls from friends and neighbours who had received the news that their beloved stock had to be destroyed. For weeks on end, the acrid smoke from the pyres invaded houses and touched every life, whether it was directly connected to our farming community or not.

Will the First Minister set out what discussions the Scottish Government has had with its UK counterparts and NFU Scotland to ensure that everything is done to prevent the disease once again wreaking havoc in Scotland?

I draw particular attention to concerns that the Republic of Ireland could become the back door through which the disease might return via our port in Cairnryan.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Active discussions on those questions are held constantly between the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments. A case of foot-and-mouth disease has emerged in Germany, so the issue is live and topical.

The Scottish Government will take all necessary steps to ensure that we are properly engaged in the process, and we will engage stakeholders to ensure that the terrible circumstances that Mr Carson reminds us of, which took place 24 years ago, are not repeated. The chief veterinary officer of the Scottish Government is actively involved in those issues, as are ministers.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a short suspension to allow people who are leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so.

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Highlands and Islands)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-15705, in the name of Rhoda Grant, on the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s spotlight report, “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands”. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s spotlight project into Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands; understands that it was commissioned in April 2023 and undertook a targeted programme of work to assess the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights for people living across the Highlands and Islands, which concluded in early 2024 and published its report, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands, in November 2024; believes that this report has been widely welcomed by community groups, charities and organisations across the Highlands and Islands; is concerned, in particular, by the Commission’s urgent calls to tackle the rooflessness, hunger and access to health issues across the Highlands and Islands; is further concerned that, according to the report, across all rights examined, there is not a single human right that meets all the conditions of adequacy under international law, and notes the calls on the Scottish Government to act on this report and review its current policies to address the concerns raised by this report.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

I thank members who signed my motion and allowed this important debate to take place. I also pay tribute to the Scottish Human Rights Commission for its spotlight report, “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands”.

In the past decade or so, our human rights have been eroded: we need food banks, there is a housing crisis and our national health service is at breaking point. Nowhere has that been felt more keenly than in the Highlands and Islands. Centralisation of services has led to poorer outcomes, even fewer houses being built and greater difficulty in accessing health services. All of that leads to depopulation. Citizens know that, so the Scottish Human Rights Commission findings were not a surprise. However, to be consulted and have their concerns validated is a significant step forward for my constituents. It was also striking to see all those findings in one report.

Across all the rights that the report examined,

“there is not a single human right that meets all the conditions of adequacy under international law. This means that there are significant failures in how policies and services are being designed and ... delivered.”

Too often, service design focuses on urban areas and fails to address the unique needs of rural communities. However, when services are designed to meet the needs of rural areas, they work effectively in all settings, regardless of whether they are in an urban area or a rural area.

The commission recommends that the Government should use a human rights-based budgeting approach to ensure that all citizens are provided with services that meet their needs, regardless of where they live. The report references cases in Argyll and Bute in which women who have been sexually assaulted need to travel long distances to access forensic examinations. They need to do that in the same clothes that they wore when they were assaulted. That is a common situation throughout the Highlands and Islands. The reason given for that inhumane treatment was that it would cost more to bring services to those women. A human rights-based approach would have come to a different conclusion, resulting in a process based on upholding the rights of the person who had been attacked.

Our human rights are just that: they are our rights. However, in Scots law, there is no redress if someone does not have access to their human rights. The proposed Scottish human rights bill was anticipated to address that but, unfortunately, it has been shelved. As a result, I still hope to pursue a right to food bill to enshrine the human right to food in Scots law. Everyone has the right to food so that they can feed themselves and their families. Emergency food should be required only in dire circumstances such as war and famine, but the report highlighted that access to food is a significant problem in the Highlands and Islands. It pointed out that, in some areas, food supplies could be at risk due to ferry failures and blocked roads disrupting supplies.

Food also costs much more in sparsely populated rural areas. Independent shops cannot make economies of scale, which means that the food that they sell is more expensive. There are also barriers to accessing emergency food in rural areas, because of issues around privacy and confidentiality. It is hard enough to access a food bank in an urban area because of stigma, so imagine doing that when the whole community will know. I know that food banks go to extraordinary lengths to disguise their interventions, but confidentiality is still a concern that stops many people accessing that support.

The report talks about choices being made between heating and eating. In rural areas, people also need to factor in the cost of running a car, because public transport is inadequate or non-existent. Therefore, they require fuel not only for heat but in order to access work, education, food and healthcare.

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I am sure that Rhoda Grant will join me in acknowledging just how many people in the Highlands and Islands are in fuel poverty—I believe that the figure in the Western Isles is about 40 per cent and that 100,000 pensioners will receive a universal payment next year but will not receive one over this winter. The fuel rebate scheme for cars and vehicles is also critical in the wider context in relation to things such as the just transition, given that, at the end of the day, people in the Highlands and Islands are more dependent on vehicles.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I can give you the time back for the intervention, Ms Grant.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

I agree with the cabinet secretary—people in the area are dependent on vehicles, and I note that some of the measures that are used to pinpoint poverty take the view that someone who owns a car is not living in poverty, but the very opposite is true in many rural areas, where a car is a necessity.

The report finds that the lack of affordable housing is also a main concern of young people, many of whom are not able to remain in their local areas or to return to live there after leaving. We know that many people in the Highlands and Islands leave to access education with the full intention of returning but are often unable to do so. That fuels depopulation and the loss of the Gaelic language and is adding to an increasing age demographic.

Second homes and holiday homes bring tension, because they take away homes from local people, but, on the other hand, they bring tourism. Therefore, there needs to be a balance between family homes and the holiday rental sector.

The cost of building small numbers of affordable houses in a community is expensive due to the lack of economies of scale so, when we add the cost of materials and labour, it is little wonder that rural housing money is being spent on the outskirts of cities. That is why we must protect local housing, especially homes that are built at public expense.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Rhoda Grant is making a very powerful speech on the report. Perhaps she might reflect on the power of co-operatives and their potential further development in rural settings, which might improve economic justice in areas such as housing, retail and food production.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

Indeed. Co-operatives are already used in rural areas. Crofting, which is the agricultural system in place in rural areas, is based on co-operative working. Many people know that they need to work co-operatively in rural areas simply in order to exist.

The report also highlights access to health and social care. There are many campaigns in the Highlands and Islands regarding access to health care, from the Caithness Health Action Team and the keep MUM—maternity unit for Moray—campaign, which fights for local maternity services, to the Hopeman and Burghead groups that campaign for local general practice surgeries. Those groups are not surprised by the commission’s report, but they are appreciative of it highlighting issues that they have been campaigning on for years.

Mental health services in the region are poor, especially for young people. The waiting list for child and adolescent mental health services in NHS Highland is stubbornly high, and services are provided centrally, which means that young people need to take more time away from school and make long journeys to access them. The costs of travel and accommodation are also barriers to accessing healthcare. We desperately need a review of the outdated patient travelling expenses scheme for reimbursements.

Many other issues are addressed by the Scottish Human Rights Commission report—more than I can do credit to today. I thank it for carrying out that important work. We, in the Parliament, owe it to the commission to act on its findings. We wish it well in presenting its findings to the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights next month.

I brought forward this debate to highlight the report’s findings and to ask the Scottish Government to respond to it and say whether it will use human rights-based budgeting to protect all our human rights, including the human rights of people in the Highlands and Islands, in the future.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

First, I thank Rhoda Grant for securing this important debate. I was glad to support her motion. Secondly, I thank the Scottish Human Rights Commission for undertaking the work.

Although I strongly believe that organisations that seek to represent the views of all Scotland must come to the Highlands and Islands, that is not usually what happens, so it was very welcome to see such thorough and interested engagement across the region ahead of the debate.

It is right that the resulting report gets aired in the Parliament and that we get a chance to hear the Government’s response to the many issues that it raises. The report covers issues that the people who are contributing to the debate regularly raise in the Parliament. I recognise much of what is described in the report—-I could have perhaps written 12 different speeches on it—and I know how valuable the evidence on access and transport to healthcare, availability of food and general quality of life is.

I will focus largely on what I think is the most severe human rights issue that the report explores. Although homelessness exists across Scotland, it does so differently in different communities. In Skye, we are more likely to see young people being homeless at home, whereas, in Inverness, people might be stuck for long periods in unsuitable accommodation. If people in rural and island communities know that no social housing is available anywhere near them, they might not register as homeless, because they believe that there is no point.

All that hidden homelessness deserves full attention. It is important to note that the SHRC’s accurate description of the issue—from sofa surfing to living in temporary caravans—demonstrates to everyone that, although the issue might be hidden, it is not invisible and it is possible for us to see and react to it.

I have always tried to be very careful about how I speak about homelessness and to promote a reduction in stigma, because that stigma is real, unfair and pervasive. Having been in that situation in the Highlands, I know the dangers that come alongside it. It is not only about not having the security of going to sleep with a roof over your head, walls around you and a lock on the door; housing insecurity opens you up to a very dangerous underground culture. That is not because people who are homeless are naturally likely to break laws or drink too much; it is because they are vulnerable, even if they do not feel like they are. Bad actors see the opportunity to take advantage, sell drugs, assault and rape.

When I was homeless, I was frequently offered drugs and money. I did not take up those offers—or, more accurately, traps—but I often spent my cash-in-hand pay from temporary work on bottles of alcohol, in an effort to fast forward to my next shift, because I did not want to deal with, or look at, my own life. I completely understood why others around me opted for different substances to skip through their own living nightmares, and why young people end up stuck in a vicious cycle of being the middleman between out-of-area dealers and their next victims.

The fact that the report highlights rights holders raising their inability to access support services, such as addictions services, tells me that people are living that nightmare right now. Professionals in Orkney noted to the SHRC that a lack of availability of cannabis and support services has led to an increase in the use of harder drugs.

Services such as Addictions Counselling Inverness—a charity for which I have immense respect—do so much for the people who need help most. ACI is run by people who totally get the reality that their service users are living. It needs all the support that we can give, and such services should be available to everyone, no matter where they live.

Scotland is growing up in its approach to addiction, but something is still missing for those who need help today in the Highlands and Islands. Housing is a huge part of the picture. We cannot expect people to live stable and responsible lives when they have been left out in the cold. We must put at least as much energy into supporting them—giving them what they, individually, need to be safe—as those who prey on the vulnerable put into recruiting them.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I thank Rhoda Grant for bringing this debate to the chamber. Along with debates this afternoon on the A9 dualling and on rural healthcare, it begins a very welcome focus to the Parliament today on issues that impact on the Highlands and Islands region—the focus on those issues is welcome because they are being discussed, rather than because of the underlying reasons why they are being discussed and the failure to deliver rural and island services.

This evening, I will speak in my colleague Tim Eagle’s debate on rural healthcare, so I will not focus on that now, other than to say that the impact of pressure on our health services is often felt more acutely in our more remote rural and island communities. Distance to care, and the impact of healthcare services being further away from those who use them, is a real and growing concern. When that pressure includes the downgrading of maternity services and a lack of social care, it challenges the sustainability of many of our communities.

The deterioration of health services is far from being the only challenge. After 18 years of this Government, we have a housing emergency in Scotland—a crisis that the Scottish National Party responded to by cutting the housing budget by nearly £200 million. Added to that, the dedicated rural and islands housing funds were not fully utilised, with millions of pounds left in Government coffers in Edinburgh despite the schemes being extended and there being a clear and desperate need for more affordable housing in our communities.

Transport connectivity was also highlighted in the commission’s report, and the crisis faced by our ferry-reliant communities has been raised in Parliament on too many occasions to mention. It is not only islanders who suffer; residents and businesses that are reliant on the ageing and unreliable ferries that serve the Corran Narrows route in Lochaber have been extremely vocal on just how great a threat the lack of a reliable service is to the sustainability of their communities. When I visited that area as part of my summer tour, many people were quite clear that, without action—soon—they would be forced to move away from the area that they call home.

Many Highland roads are not much better. Last year, I dealt with the case of a household who were stuck in their property because the condition of their road left them isolated in their home. There were potholes so large that the local delivery drivers refused to deliver to them. Thankfully, after a letter to the council on their behalf, work was done on the road and they can enjoy their home again, but also leave when they want to.

That issue of enjoying one’s home leads me on to another issue that I would like to raise, although it is not included in the report. People across my region are faced with the prospect of increased industrialisation of their communities, but they see little or no gain from it, and they feel powerless to have their say on it. New pylons, substations and other energy infrastructure are being forced on communities across the Highlands and Islands without their permission, and too often with only the most token amount of consultation—consultation that many see as almost a fait accompli. That is a clear democratic and moral deficit.

That leads me to my last point, which is about how decisions are made and their impact. Island residents have seen the introduction of legislation on island proofing to allow the consideration of unique island needs, although many are understandably sceptical about whether it is anything more than a tick-box exercise. However, rural communities are not afforded the same protections, despite many being as remote as—and, in some cases, more remote than—some of our island communities.

The report is interesting but, for many of us who live in the Highlands and Islands, it tells us little that we do not already know. There is a lack of affordable housing. Healthcare services are becoming more distant for some and inaccessible for too many. There is fuel poverty in communities that are circled by machines that heat the homes of others many miles away. Many people in the Highlands and Islands feel a long way from the decisions that are made here in Edinburgh but those decisions impact greatly on their lives. Although the Highlands and Islands are still a great place in which to live, work and be brought up, it is getting harder for many people to do that.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I thank Rhoda Grant for initiating this critical debate and the Scottish Human Rights Commission for having the courage to carry the inquiry out and publish its findings in full.

In her excellent foreword, Angela O’Hagan calls for

“all duty bearers to evaluate their own work and reflect on how to improve people’s human rights.”

She also calls for the Scottish Parliament

“to take serious and careful consideration”

of the report, so why does it take an Opposition MSP to force the report to the debating chamber of the Parliament in members’ business time? Are not the Government and the Parliament duty bearers? Should not the Government set aside parliamentary time to debate a report into the human rights of the people of the Highlands and Islands?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Of course, if Mr Leonard’s business manager cares to raise that matter with me, I would be more than willing to give consideration to scheduling such a debate.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Richard Leonard, I can give you the time back.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Thank you.

I hope that the Minister for Parliamentary Business will propose that at a future meeting of the business bureau. However, I will tell members why it perhaps has not come up so far. Perhaps it is because the key words in the report are “failure”, “regression” and “deterioration”.

“Across all rights examined,”

the commission concludes,

“there is not a single human right that meets all the conditions of adequacy under international law”—

not one. Minimum core obligations such as access to food and housing are not being met. The situation with rights to health, social care, education and culture is not getting better; it is getting worse.

Those are not abstract or theoretical findings. Those rights are about ensuring that everyone can live a dignified life, free from fear and want, but what the report finds is that there is hunger, deprivation and malnutrition. I made some inquiries recently, only to discover that Public Health Scotland does not routinely collect data on malnutrition. However, it should do so, because we know from the British Association for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition that the number of patients who are admitted to hospital diagnosed with malnutrition has doubled to more than 44 per cent in the past decade.

When I was with Rhoda Grant in Shetland, we met the workers at the Sullom Voe terminal, a northerly centre for the United Kingdom oil and gas industry for more than four decades. We sat down and spoke with representatives of the very impressive Shetland Fishermen’s Federation. They told us that their members net one sixth of the catch for the whole of the UK. However, we know that a third of the inhabitants of Shetland are living in fuel poverty. It reminded me of Aneurin Bevan’s observation:

“This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time.”

In other words, what is wrong is the way in which our society and economy are organised; what is wrong is the way in which power and wealth are distributed. Even among small Highlands and Islands communities that are blighted by hunger, ruthlessness and fuel poverty, there exists great affluence. There is Anders Holch Povlsen—the richest man in Scotland—and the old aristocracy, including the Earl of Seafield, Earl Granville, the Earl of Sutherland, the Camerons of Lochiel and the Duke of Westminster, all with massive land ownership and vast wealth.

The report is right to determine the equality gap in fundamental human rights between rural and urban Scotland. It is right to point to the acute levels of homelessness in our Highlands and Islands, as well as to the access that is denied to basic public services and fundamental human rights such as food and clothing.

However, we have to understand the colossal wealth gap that exists in the Highlands and Islands. We have to recognise the pernicious division of class. We have to comprehend that, unless we tackle this obscene and rising inequality—the division in income, wealth and power—we will never address the fundamental breaches of human rights that are highlighted in this very serious, important and ground-breaking report.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the Scottish Human Rights Commission for producing its frank and hard-hitting report, and I thank Rhoda Grant for raising it in the chamber.

Although Highlands and Islands MSPs are all too aware of the challenges that the communities that we represent face, I trust that the report catalyses urgent action. As we have heard from members across the chamber, the report covers a range of core obligations that must be addressed. I will focus on two areas in which Scotland is not meeting minimum essential human rights requirements: housing and food.

It is shameful that our people’s survival and dignity are being threatened by Government inaction. Since being elected, my priorities have been to maintain and sustain rural and island populations, to support communities to adapt to the impacts of climate change and to help them to participate in restoring nature. Food and housing are key to those aims, yet a lack of Government priority and action means that Scotland is failing to meet even its most basic international obligations.

On food, the report says that high prices and poverty are depriving a significant number of people of sufficient food. Even physically accessing affordable nutrition is a challenge, with bad weather, creaking infrastructure and overtourism depriving entire communities of fresh food. Basically, people are being left to fend for themselves, with little to no support from the Government.

However, solutions to those problems exist. I have seen how effective community-led growing initiatives have been in providing nutritious food to communities. Tagsa Uibhist in the Western Isles runs market gardens that not only diversify food supply chains but support people to access a wider variety of foods. Such projects must be better funded, and I secured the passing of an amendment to the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 that aims to open new support pathways for such projects. I urge the Government to provide that support swiftly to guarantee food to our Highland and Island communities.

The report highlights the dire housing situation across the region. I frequently hear from constituents who are unable to access affordable homes in their communities. The report has rightly identified that that is a major driver of depopulation. Although the Government has recognised the issue to some extent, its housing targets are not on track to reduce homelessness. We heard earlier from Emma Roddick what that can bring about in people’s lives.

Of Scotland’s population, 17 per cent is rural, yet the Government’s target aims to build only 10 per cent of affordable homes in rural areas. The report shows that there are not enough small, cheap-to-run properties as it is and, judging by current activity, the situation will not improve any time soon.

We must see more support for capacity-building organisations so that communities have support to meet their own housing needs; we must see councils adopting facilitation and supportive approaches to help communities to meet those needs; and we must see the Scottish Government provide the right level of funding to ensure that we exceed the 10 per cent target.

Although construction is important, it must go hand in hand with turning existing empty properties into homes. We can make three restored empty properties for the price of one new build. Let us become a retrofit nation and solve this crisis.

As an MSP, I consistently raise those vital issues and offer solutions. I hope that the damning findings of the SHRC’s report focus hearts and minds at all levels of government. As Professor Angela O’Hagan says in the report, while some communities may be remote,

“their access to human rights should not be.”

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

I thank Rhoda Grant for bringing this important debate to the chamber. The Scottish Human Rights Commission’s report “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands” fills an identified gap in evidence on economic, social and cultural rights in rural Scotland, and I extend my thanks to all the researchers and participants who were involved in the project.

The report demonstrates many long-standing and interconnected issues that I have previously raised in the chamber. Its findings are familiar to those of us with experience of life in rural and island Scotland. The report confirms that much of the housing stock in the region is old, poorly insulated and prone to damp, mould and expensive heating costs. That rings true for Shetland, which has among the highest rates of fuel poverty in the country. The irony that the islands are in the centre of the country’s energy production area is not lost on those of us who live there.

The fact that building costs are higher than in other areas of Scotland is an evident barrier to house building in Shetland. There has been a slowdown in construction as a result of the pandemic and Brexit, which, along with the increased cost of construction materials, has resulted in insufficient available stock and building capacity.

The report found that, in some areas, a lack of housing is the single biggest factor that is contributing to depopulation. That can lead to people leaving the region, but it can also—as is happening in Shetland—result in people moving from islands and rural areas to towns.

The lack of affordable and available housing is cited as the biggest barrier to filling key worker and professional roles. Another significant barrier to participation in employment is poor digital access, which also exacerbates social isolation. The Scottish Government is already well aware that parts of the Highlands and Islands suffer from digital exclusion, and it must do more to enact targeted and comprehensive solutions to bridge that digital divide.

Regarding barriers to the right to health, the report notes that there is particular concern about the provision of maternity and gynaecology services in Caithness and Sutherland, which is an issue that my MP colleague Jamie Stone has long been campaigning on. Since maternity provision in Wick was downgraded, more than 14,000 patients a year have had to travel to Inverness, and no risk assessments on patient safety are carried out. Women who were surveyed reported feeling unsafe and terrified by the journey and by the possibility of giving birth en route. Due to delays in accessing the hospital in emergencies, some women have been left with loss of fertility. The situation is unsustainable and is putting patients at risk. I urge the Scottish Government to review the maternity model for the north of Scotland.

Patients across the Highlands and Islands incur substantial costs in accessing healthcare. As the report states, reimbursement

“rarely covers the actual costs of travel and ... accommodation.”

I am not surprised that the report found that some people choose not to access healthcare due to travel costs. For Shetland patients, attending an appointment on the Scottish mainland often involves spending multiple nights away because of transport schedules, which increases the cost. I have pressed the Scottish Government for action on its promised review of the patient travel scheme. It must prioritise that as a matter of urgency.

Scotland’s islands and rural areas are home to resourceful and supportive communities, but those communities should not be left to fill the gaps that are highlighted in the report. The Scottish Government should take seriously people’s reported feelings of despair and of being neglected. It is not too much to ask for people who live in the Highlands and Islands not to be disadvantaged simply because of where they live. I ask the Government to review its policies to address the concerns that are raised in the report. It is time for the Government to be serious about supporting rural and island Scotland.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

I congratulate Rhoda Grant on bringing this important debate to the chamber, and I join her and other rural MSPs in welcoming the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s spotlight report.

Although the project’s findings are specific to the Highlands and Islands, they resonate deeply with us in Dumfries and Galloway. The report, which has been widely praised by community groups, charities and organisations, highlights the pervasive issues of rooflessness, hunger and limited access to healthcare—issues that we in Galloway are all too familiar with.

With rooflessness and homelessness remaining a pressing concern, many individuals and families continue to struggle with inadequate housing. That impacts not only on their physical safety but on their mental and emotional wellbeing. In rural Galloway, we have seen the devastating effects of rooflessness on our communities, so it is imperative that we take concrete steps to provide safe and affordable housing for all our residents. Sadly, the current target for house building in rural Scotland is an arbitrary figure that does not address the unique challenges that we face, and that is another factor that drives depopulation.

The issue of hunger is equally critical across Scotland. Given that we are a country that is rich in agricultural resources, it is unbelievable that food insecurity remains a reality for many. The report’s findings serve as a stark reminder that we must do more to ensure that everyone has access to nutritious and affordable food. That is a matter not just of survival but of dignity and equality.

The report highlights access to healthcare as another significant challenge. In Dumfries and Galloway, just as in the Highlands, there are long waiting times and limited availability of services, which are barriers to the care that our residents need. That is not only a violation of their rights but a threat to their health and wellbeing. We need increased investment in healthcare infrastructure to ensure that everyone, regardless of their location, can access the medical care that they require.

The report’s finding that

“not a single human right”

that was examined

“meets all the conditions of adequacy under international law”

is deeply concerning. That highlights the urgent need for policy reforms and renewed efforts to uphold and protect those fundamental rights. The Scottish Government must act on the report and review its current policies to address the deficiencies that have been identified.

Dr Gordon Baird, who is a retired GP and an influential medical expert, commented to me on the SHRC’s findings of

“inaccessible health care services that fail to meet minimum core obligations”

and, more worryingly, of

“a lack of a cohesive or coherent strategy to fulfil these obligations”,

as well as

“policies that should be adaptable to the specific needs of remote and rural areas”.

In west Galloway, the main town of Stranraer is 75 miles west of the administrative hub of Dumfries and 85 miles south-west of Glasgow, which is where the closest tertiary medical centre is located. In 1999, the editor of the BMJ reported that

“Dumfries looks on Stranraer as a ‘wild west’ town that makes much too much fuss and won’t accept that it’s a rural backwater”.

It seems to me that that attitude towards rural residents persists across rural areas, with health board managers often dismissing areas as out west—such as in my case—or as a problem. The situation is now worse than ever, with the main issues being maternity care, cancer, step-down care and cottage hospital facilities. Deprivation compounds the effects, too.

The report identifies that

“Some of the most critical issues ... are the apparent failure to meet the most basic international obligations”

and finds that

“Another area of concern is the apparent regression or deterioration of rights”,

which is being

“exacerbated by decisions on budget reductions or indeed the complete elimination of previously existing services, without sufficient mitigating measures.”

Across rural Scotland, we can draw valuable lessons from the spotlight project. By acknowledging the shared challenges, we can work together to find solutions that can benefit all.

We commend the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s spotlight project for its critical insight, but our response must extend beyond recognition—we must commit to taking tangible actions on all the issues that it has identified. The Scottish Government must review and revise its policies to ensure the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights for all the residents of all of rural Scotland, not just the Highlands and Islands. It must not wait for the commission to look into the same issues in the south of Scotland. Across the chamber, we must strive to build a more just and equitable Scotland, where everybody’s individual rights are respected.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I, too, thank Rhoda Grant for bringing the motion to Parliament. Like her, I thank the Scottish Human Rights Commission for the report that is at the centre of the debate, and I very much echo the sentiments that have been expressed on the detail and breadth of the report. I commend the commission’s programme of work to hear directly from rights holders across 20 of our Highlands and Islands communities, as has been mentioned in contributions today.

Contrary to Mr Leonard’s concern that the Scottish Government has not allocated time for these matters to be explored, during last month’s human rights day debate, the report rightly generated significant interest and welcome challenge on advancing human rights realisation for people in our Highlands and Islands.

The report is wide ranging—

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Of course.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

For clarity, does that mean that you will schedule Government time to debate the report?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I will not. I ask the minister to respond.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Of course, your perspective on these matters is always welcome, Presiding Officer.

I go back to my earlier point that I am more than willing to consider these matters. I remind Mr Leonard that his party regularly has time to bring forward its own debates, and I am sure that he will speak to his business manager about allocating a debate in Labour Party time. I will, of course, give consideration to using Scottish Government time as well.

As I was saying, the report is wide ranging and the rights that are described in it touch on virtually every area of life in the Highlands and Islands. Many of the challenges that are described are interconnected. I recognise that the report rightly poses challenges to the Scottish Government. We are considering the report and we will come back, in due course, on how we intend to respond to it.

Although some of the issues that are raised apply beyond the Highlands and Islands, as Mr Carson has reminded us, we need to make sure that our actions reflect the specific needs of the communities that are directly referred to in the report, in order to advance the realisation of all of their human rights.

Before turning to members’ contributions in detail, I briefly acknowledge the approach that the commission has taken in the report. In particular, I welcome its efforts to pilot a new model of human rights monitoring that brings together the lived experiences of our Highlands and Islands communities with other qualitative and quantitative data that assesses that evidence against international human rights standards. I am aware that the commission plans to expand that model over the coming years to build a baseline picture of economic, social and cultural rights realisation across the breadth of Scotland. In some senses, the report is a trailblazer and its methodology will be applicable beyond the Highlands and Islands.

I am grateful to members for their contributions. The report is wide ranging and touches on work across all portfolios. Emma Roddick made some inference to that when she said that she could have delivered 12 speeches on the subject. I will not be able to respond to the full breadth of matters in detail, but I assure members that the Government is considering the report carefully.

The Government continues to take action that is geared towards improving service delivery and design, to meet the specific needs of communities in the Highlands and Islands. That includes action to address some of the issues that are outlined in the commission’s report on housing, transport and depopulation, for example.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

One proposal in the report that the Government could implement now is human rights-based budgeting. Will that be considered? That would address an awful lot of the concerns that were raised in the report.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I have already made the point that the Government will give full consideration to everything in the report—as it should, because it is a thorough and diligent piece of work—and that is one of the areas that will be considered.

On investment and support for the Highlands and Islands, I was about to mention some of the activity that we are undertaking in the here and now. Since 2021-22, our islands programme capital funding scheme has distributed more than £15 million of support for 71 infrastructure projects across 51 different islands. Beatrice Wishart mentioned digital connectivity, and I know that some of the greatest challenges in this country in that regard are in the Highlands and Islands. We have provided investment of more than £600 million in our reaching 100 per cent programme, which is expected to connect more than 113,000 premises across Scotland. Our forthcoming delivery plan and the new national islands plan will set out how we will deliver for our mainland, rural and island communities.

Turning to food insecurity and the right to food, which have been touched on, I note that Rhoda Grant, in particular, has continued to champion issues of hunger and food insecurity. It should go without saying—I will say it anyway—that no one should have to compromise on food or other essentials. Food insecurity is driven by insufficient and insecure household income. That is one reason why we continue to call on the UK Government to deliver an essentials guarantee—for which the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has also called, estimating that, this year, that could lift 140,000 people in Scotland out of poverty.

The point was made about some people having to choose between heating and eating, and the Deputy First Minister made the point that nearly 40 per cent of the population of the Western Isles are in fuel poverty. Beatrice Wishart also mentioned the issue—I do not have the specific numbers, but it is a challenge in Shetland as well. Of course, we know that that is an issue.

Jamie Halcro Johnston spoke about some of the challenges of infrastructure and the irony that those areas in which the energy is generated do not benefit directly from it. I reflect on the fact that the energy market is regulated from Westminster rather than by the Scottish Government, but we are aware of those challenges.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The point that was being made is that a lot of the planning decisions on energy infrastructure are being passed by the Scottish Government.

You said that—

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Speak through the chair.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

My apologies. The minister said that the Government would give due consideration to the report and would come back in due course. When it comes to timescales, “due course” means nothing. When does the minister expect to come back with the Government’s response?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

It would be remiss of me to provide an exact timescale, and I do not have one before me just now. However, the commitment is to come back as soon as possible.

The report was published in November, which is not that long ago. Nonetheless, I remind Richard Leonard that we were able to have a debate on human rights just a month afterwards, in which some of the issues were reflected.

My point on fuel poverty and the choice between heating and eating is that we should welcome the fact that Scottish Government initiatives, including the Scottish child payment, are keeping tens of thousands of children out of poverty. From next year, we will implement our winter heating payment, which will reverse the removal of the winter fuel payment for 100,000 people across the Highlands and Islands. Again, that was referred to by the Deputy First Minister.

To return to the issue of the right to food, the Government agrees with Rhoda Grant that such a right should be brought into Scots law. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice has met Rhoda Grant to discuss those matters and will continue to give them consideration.

Presiding Officer, I think that I am well over my time.

There is much more that I could say, which reflects my earlier point that this is a wide-ranging report to which we will give consideration. I have been unable to touch on many of the issues that I had hoped to touch on—for example, in relation to housing, including our on-going investment in social housing. That is a challenge across the country, particularly in the Highlands and Islands. I reassure Ariane Burgess that the commitment to building social housing—affordable housing, rather—in rural and island communities involves at least 10 per cent of the houses that we will build being in such communities. I emphasise the point that it will be at least 10 per cent.

I thank members for their contributions and I give an assurance to the Parliament that I will consider the report’s contents and come back in due course.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes the debate, and I suspend this meeting of Parliament until 2 o’clock.

Portfolio Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is portfolio question time and the portfolio is net zero and energy, and transport.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government when it estimates that ScotRail will end the use of short-formed trains that run on rail services between Fife and Edinburgh. (S6O-04209)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

ScotRail has taken a number of steps to improve the service for rail passengers travelling to and from Fife. Diesel trains newly released from some of the intercity routes are now serving Fife, thereby increasing fleet resilience, and additional stops will continue to be made at Dalmeny and Burntisland to reduce pressure on the busy morning and evening Leven services.

I acknowledge that there was a challenging autumn, with disruptions being significantly higher than they were in the previous year. Despite that, ScotRail achieved a strong recovery, and available seat capacity for Fife during the four weeks covering the festive period was 92.9 per cent, which was higher than the 90.3 per cent that was recorded in the same period the previous year.

We want that recovery in performance to continue and I have asked for close monitoring of the Fife service in order to continue to improve capacity where possible and to end the use of short-formed trains.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

As the cabinet secretary knows, I have been raising that issue for years and have been promised for years that it is going to get better, but it does not. Even in the past few weeks, two-carriage trains have pulled into Inverkeithing station already packed, with passengers standing. Those trains are therefore not able to take on any more passengers and people who are waiting to get to Edinburgh are left stranded on the platform and are late for work. That happens time and again, so can we please have a timescale for bringing the practice to an end?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I appreciate the concerns that are being raised. The Deputy Presiding Officer frequently raises those concerns in her correspondence to me. I absolutely sympathise with the situation, which is not acceptable for passengers. I remember regularly being on short-formed trains prior to electrification of the Glasgow-Edinburgh line. However, the timescale will depend on fleet replacement. I will, of course, update members from Fife, and members more widely, when that occurs.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that ScotRail must retain the operational independence that is necessary for it when responding to emerging situations, such as in relation to the availability of drivers and trains, and keeping trains running? Can she set out the importance of links between Fife and Edinburgh and how the Scottish National Party Government is committed to maintaining and improving them?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

ScotRail, as the train operator, has the necessary level of expertise to allocate its resources to meet passenger demand as suits it best. The link between Edinburgh and Fife is very important, particularly for Fife passengers commuting or travelling for education or leisure.

Electrification work that is under way between Edinburgh and Dalmeny is the first step towards electrification of the Fife route. A rolling programme of decarbonisation and new-fleet procurement strategies will reduce the need for diesel trains across the network, and will bring in new trains with improved reliability. In addition, we are investing £35 million in a new feeder station at Thornton in Fife to facilitate the future electrification of Fife services.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

In November, the cabinet secretary said in a letter that she had made it clear to ScotRail that the situation in Fife must improve as quickly as possible, but figures from ScotRail show that, in November, the 07:16 service from Perth to Edinburgh was short-formed on more than half of its timetabled journeys, which left passengers unable to board. The use of short-formed services is not reflected within the public performance measure, so do the Scottish Government and ScotRail take those services into account when assessing and improving service delivery for passengers?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am clear that improvement is needed. It is an issue that I constantly raise with ScotRail. I have asked for regular reports on the number of trains that are booked and on seat availability, and I have received them. That is why I can relay that there have been improvements in seat-availability performance, particularly over the past four weeks. However, I acknowledged in my first answer the situation in November. As I said, there were significant disruptions, during the period, due to a variety of factors, including infrastructure.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government how it will work with local authorities to address road improvements. (S6O-04210)

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

We all recognise that it is important for there to be a safe and resilient road network throughout Scotland. However, as local roads are the responsibility of local authorities, it is for individual councils to allocate resources based on their local needs. The Scottish Government will provide over £15 billion in the 2025-26 local government settlement, increasing the resources that are available to local government by £1 billion, which represents a real-terms increase of 4.7 per cent. At the same time, in the budget for 2025-26, we propose to increase expenditure on trunk road maintenance to £714 million.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Since 2022, there have been more than 26,000 reported potholes on Fife’s roads, including 224 on the six roads that lead in and out of the village of Saline in west Fife alone. The cost of fixing the backlog of repairs in Fife has increased by more than £23 million and now sits at £100 million. Despite the slight uplift in councils’ budgets this year, which the minister mentioned, they have been struggling with underfunding for almost two decades, and the higher bills for repairs mean simply that they have less resources for other priorities.

Does the minister accept that the money that local authorities spend on filling the thousands of road defects would be better spent on long-term road surface improvements? How will the Scottish Government work with local authorities to establish a fairer funding process that will allow our councils to fix the backlog?

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

As I said in my previous answer, the Scottish Government is increasing local authority funding by more than £1 billion. I fully accept the frustration that Roz McCall expresses, but decisions about how local authorities are going to repair the roads are really for them to take.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

From 1 January to 12 November last year, North Ayrshire motorists endured 2,457 days of closed roads. The minister will understand the frustration of many road users about the duration of the closures, especially when no visible work is being carried out or there is no one on site. What more can the Scottish Government do to work with local authorities and, indeed, on its own network, to diminish the negative impacts of lengthy closures and minimise their occurrence?

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

I absolutely understand the frustration about road closures in the same way as I understand the frustration about potholes, especially when sites appear to be empty. However, there are, generally, good engineering and safety reasons for closures. They are used only when they are unavoidable, and they are implemented to protect either Scotland’s road workers or the public.

Local authorities have powers to direct that unreasonably prolonged works be completed by a given date and they have inspectorate powers in relation to utilities works. When I and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport met the Scottish Road Works Commissioner recently, we raised the issue of co-ordination of works. Since April 2024, the commissioner has also had inspectorate powers, use of which will be reported on in the next annual report. I and the cabinet secretary emphasised to him that the frustration is causing real concern.

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

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government transport secretary regarding the £5 million contribution that the previous Administration made towards a feasibility study into the extension of the Borders railway. (S6O-04211)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I last raised concerns with the UK Government transport ministers in October, and I was assured that overall growth deal funding commitments in Scotland would continue, which was reflected in their budget. The Scottish Government has agreed in principle to the proposal for a project manager to oversee the business case for the extension of the Borders railway. Similar approval is still awaited from the UK Government. I have requested a meeting with the new Secretary of State for Transport and I intend to raise the matter then.

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

As this is a pressing matter, I hope that we will shortly have from the UK Government a timeline for delivery of its half share of the £10 million for the feasibility study on the extension. The cabinet secretary mentioned the proposed senior project manager, and I note that Scottish Borders Council has agreed to appoint one from April. Although it is prepared to fund the post from that time if it has to, I do not think that that would be fair to the council. I hope that the cabinet secretary will impress that on the UK Government.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Indeed, I will impress that on the UK Government. It has to be recognised that the borderlands inclusive growth deal is a cross-border arrangement. It is important that the Scottish Government does not bypass the governance of that deals or others. The arrangement requires project proposals to be approved by both Governments. Scottish Borders Council is keen to progress the study, as am I, so I will raise with the UK Government the point that I do not think that it is fair that Scottish Borders Council has been left for such a length of time. Obviously, the council is carrying some risk, if it wants to appoint a project manager in April.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

I agree completely with what the cabinet secretary said. There is a risk that Scottish Borders Council will be bankrolling that funding for a feasibility study project manager. Would it be helpful for us to work in a cross-party manner so that we can put pressure on the Labour Government to release the £5 million in funding that has already been promised in the budget?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Members will continue to do that, cross-party. As Rachael Hamilton is aware, I visited Galashiels and met the campaign group there. However, I have a role as Cabinet Secretary for Transport, so I have raised not only that matter, but funding support for general growth deals. In October, during my first meeting with the Secretary of State for Scotland, we considered other issues—for example, the union connectivity fund and what was going to happen with it. I will carry out my responsibilities when I get an opportunity to meet the Secretary of State for Transport. If members from all parties help by supporting the case, that would be very helpful.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to ScotRail ticket offices scoring one out of five in the most recent service quality inspection regime data. (S6O-04212)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Those scores are disappointing, and I expect to see facilities provided that meet the needs of passengers. However, those scores demonstrate that SQUIRE is one of the most rigorous regimes of its kind. Many of the target levels are set at 90 per cent or higher. It audits 362 stations and 250 trains in every four-week period. That rigorous approach to inspection by the Scottish Government helps ScotRail to achieve consistently higher passenger satisfaction scores when compared with other rail operators in Great Britain, and most recently, ScotRail scored 90 per cent for overall passenger satisfaction.

The failures that the member mentioned are linked to ticket offices when staff are not present to open the office when expected, and therefore, to provide access to facilities. ScotRail has advised us that the opening times for ticket offices will become more reliable once the revised opening times have been agreed and all necessary arrangements to implement the changes have been put in place.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Transport Scotland stated that the low scores for ticket offices were due to the pending outcome of the station opening hours staff consultation, but the issue is long standing: ticket offices scored one out of five in almost every inspection since 2023. What action has the Scottish Government sought from ScotRail to resolve the issues? Can the ongoing consultation be considered a fair assessment of the service if it is not currently being delivered?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am concerned that, when 78 per cent of tickets used to be bought at ticket offices and that figure has gone down to 14 per cent, there will be circumstances—whether for reasons of maintenance or other issues for which staff want to be elsewhere—in which an office is closed when it is meant to be open. That has not helped the scores. That should and could be resolved with more certainty and reliability about when ticket offices will be open.

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

Will the cabinet secretary set out how the pending outcome of the ongoing station opening hours consultation would have affected those scores, how the Government expects to see significantly improved scores and how all that will drive efficiency and improvements on our publicly owned railway?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We need efficiency and improvement on our railways. The management of that is the responsibility of ScotRail. However, as I have said in a previous answer, the new regime will ensure that staff are made available at stations. They might not be in ticket offices, but they will be at stations after the vast majority of changes have taken place. Indeed, stations where there are increases in scores are where there is accessibility to allow use of ticket barriers and so on.

Things move on, change and need to be improved. The SQUIRE inspectors will use the agreed times for inspection purposes, so we would expect ticket offices and facilities to be open and fully functional. As I explained in my previous answer, that is to provide certainty and reliability that is not there at the moment.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what additional measures will be introduced to support rural housing providers to achieve the net zero emissions target by decarbonising social housing. (S6O-04213)

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

We are committed to delivering vital support to decarbonise homes through the social housing net zero heat fund, which has been supporting social landlords to retrofit their housing stock since 2020. To date, the fund has helped to decarbonise more than 13,000 homes. To support rural housing providers, the most recent fund refresh included a grant per property uplift for rural and remote rural locations of 11 per cent and 22 per cent respectively. That acknowledges the increased costs in rural locations and heeds calls from the sector to ensure a just transition to net zero.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Rural housing providers face unique and complex challenges that set them apart from providers in urban areas. When they attempt to meet net zero targets, they are faced with high retrofit costs due to traditional construction, lack of access to skilled labour and materials and, as the minister cited in his response, funding gaps. The grants that are given by the Government often fall short of covering the substantial costs of decarbonising rural housing. That is not to mention the difficulties of complying with the energy performance certificate system, due to the issues that I have just raised. Such issues need to be fully addressed in the heat in buildings framework when the relevant bill comes to the Parliament. Will the minister commit to working towards a tailored strategy for rural communities that does not leave them at a disadvantage?

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

The member rightly points to the distinctive housing types in different locations, including in many parts of rural Scotland. We are committed to building on the progress that has been made in improving the energy efficiency of those houses. Although some rural and island households have made the transition, we recognise that, for some properties, there are limitations due to their location or building type or, indeed, due to grid capacity. In rural and island communities, Scottish Government support is available to improve the energy efficiency of homes and to switch heating systems through, for example, the social housing net zero heat fund and various other schemes. Many of those schemes include a rural and islands uplift to reflect the very issues that the member rightly points to.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I am frequently contacted by people in rural and island communities who are struggling to figure out what is available to them in order to make the improvements that they want to make to their homes. Will the minister lay out what additional support is available for energy efficiency improvements to households in rural and island areas, including through the Home Energy Scotland grant and loan scheme?

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

The Home Energy Scotland grant and loan scheme offers a £1,500 uplift to the grant funding that is available for energy efficiency measures in remote rural areas and islands. Through our area-based schemes, we provide an uplift to reflect higher delivery costs in those areas. Households in extreme fuel poverty in remote rural and island areas can benefit from insulation improvements worth up to £21,100. The warmer homes Scotland scheme operates a national customer price model to ensure equal access to grant-funded installation of energy efficiency improvements across Scotland, including in the areas that the member mentioned.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on Transport Scotland’s engagement with Peel Ports regarding the introduction of a conservancy fee for leisure vessels sailing on the River Clyde. (S6O-04214)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Although some of Scotland’s ports are publicly owned or owned by communities, most are owned by commercial entities such as Peel Ports. It is for port owners to determine how best to manage their assets and utilise their resources, within the boundaries of any statutory requirements or limitations. In relation to fees and dues, how, when and what to charge forms part of that consideration. However, I am aware that the proposal has raised a number of concerns from vessel owners across Scotland who access the Clyde estuary. I therefore wrote to Peel Ports on 18 December regarding that issue.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that helpful reply. She is very much aware of the concerns of the boating community. She will also be aware of the work that I have undertaken, alongside Kenneth Gibson and Clare Adamson, through the cross-party group on recreational boating and marine tourism, which I convene. Will the cabinet secretary confirm whether she is prepared to meet members of the boating community in order to listen to their serious concerns about the proposal? What powers does the Scottish Government have to prevent such a fee from being imposed?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Ship, passenger and goods dues are charges that can be levied under the Harbours Act 1964. The levels at which such dues are set is, in essence, a commercial matter for the relevant port authority. Section 31 of the act provides that Scottish ministers have a right of objection to the imposition of such charges if certain criteria are met, but that right has never been used in the past 25 years. Therefore, any person who is considering making a formal objection should take independent legal advice. Given that ministers might have an adjudication role, it might not be appropriate for me to meet directly with anyone who seeks to make such a legal objection. However, I am sure that, as he is doing today, Mr McMillan will represent the interests of his constituents in the boating community.

I understand that Peel Ports has committed to conducting a consultation before considering introducing any new charges, so I encourage members of the boating community to engage with that. I am sure that, as he is doing today, Mr McMillan will continue to represent the interests of his constituents in the area.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

As Peel Ports has jurisdiction from the River Clyde at Glasgow Green right down to the Firth of Clyde, it has a significant impact on about 450 square miles of inshore waters. It has claimed that the imposition of conservancy fees for leisure vessels is common practice on the part of other statutory harbour authorities. I asked the Scottish Government whether it could provide data on that, but it does not hold such data, which I find alarming. Does the cabinet secretary understand why that is the case? Will she look to gather data on other statutory harbour authorities’ charging of leisure vessel conservancy fees? Will she also examine the oversight and regulation of port authorities in Scotland more generally?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I set out the oversight and governance aspects in my previous answer. I must point out, though, that the vast majority of port authorities are commercial operators, and we do not hold information about commercial entities across a variety of areas. However, given the current concerns, I will see whether it is possible to identify whether other commercial port authorities would be prepared to share their information to enable us to gain a better understanding. I understand that other such authorities charge in a way that has not been done for some of the vessels that we are discussing.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

To ask the Scottish Government what the current value of Scotland’s renewable energy output is to the UK economy. (S6O-04215)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The majority of electricity that is generated in Scotland is from renewable sources, and Scotland plays a crucial role in the United Kingdom’s overall renewable energy landscape. As of 24 September 2024, Scotland hosted 27 per cent of UK renewable electricity capacity. Following work that was undertaken in 2023, the Fraser of Allander Institute estimated that, in 2021, Scotland’s renewable energy sectors and supply chains supported more than £10.1 billion-worth of output, more than 42,000 full-time equivalent jobs and more than £4.7 billion of gross value added across the Scottish economy.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

It is vital that we continue to maximise Scotland’s renewables capabilities and take full advantage of our abundant natural resources. How much electricity demand is met by renewables, and how will the proposed budget continue to invest in and grow that capacity?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

In 2023, an estimated 64.7 per cent of the electricity that was consumed in Scotland came from renewable sources, but that percentage continues to grow. In quarter 3 of last year, for example, it had risen by more than 8 per cent compared with the same period in 2023.

The path to net zero presents enormous economic opportunities through supporting a just transition that creates jobs, promotes private investment and brings communities with us. The recent budget statement announced that, in 2025-26, we will commit £4.9 billion in capital and resource spend for activities that will have a positive impact on the delivery of our climate change goals. We will almost triple our capital funding for offshore wind, to £150 million. Such investment comes under year 2 of our five-year commitment to invest up to £500 million to anchor the supply chain in Scotland, which is expected to leverage £1.5 billion of additional private investment in the infrastructure and manufacturing facilities that are critical to the growth of the sector.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

It has been two years since the Scottish Government unveiled its draft energy strategy and just transition plan. Russell Borthwick, the chief executive of Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, said:

“We’ve been promised numerous times since that the final version would be published but we are still waiting, strategy-less.”

The Scottish Government is asleep at the wheel, so when will the final strategy be published?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

As I have said in many answers to similar questions from Conservative members, reserved policy in the area has been a shifting landscape, which has had an impact on some of our responses in our draft energy strategy. We are taking the time to look at that and, as the First Minister mentioned at First Minister’s question time, issues relating to the court cases, which have had an impact.

We want the energy strategy to be fit for purpose, and we are working and have been working very hard on it. We are taking into account all the consultation responses, and the strategy will be published shortly.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I can squeeze in question 8 if I get brief questions and brief answers to match.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding whether unused funds from energy efficiency area-based grant schemes could be reallocated, including to reduce fuel poverty in the coming financial year. (S6O-04216)

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

I met ministerial colleagues on 12 September 2024 to agree the issuing of grant offers for area-based schemes. We agreed that that was a priority and noted the challenge in completing some projects by March. The grant offer therefore extends to June 2025 to help to ensure ABS project completion.

We have also boosted fuel poverty support this winter by allocating an extra £20 million to the warmer homes Scotland scheme, taking its support to £85 million. Through the 2025-26 budget, we propose to invest more than £300 million in our heat in buildings programmes, including support for people in fuel poverty.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Area-based schemes are place-based approaches that can transform whole neighbourhoods by improving health, creating jobs and cutting greenhouse gas emissions, but, over the past three years, more than £60 million of a possible £192 million has gone unspent. That is because, as the minister highlighted, councils often do not receive their grant allocation until well into the financial year. Will the Scottish Government commit to making sure that the funding is made available to councils in time for the funds to be spent on vital services throughout the year?

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

As Mark Griffin identifies, area-based schemes are very valuable in addressing fuel poverty. Area-based scheme funding of up to £64 million was identified in the 2024-25 budget documents, as per the distribution agreed with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. However, ABS 2025-26 grant offers were delayed until September 2024 due to the Scottish Government facing what I hope he and others will acknowledge was an emergency spending control situation. However, from what I have said, he will be aware of the value that the Scottish Government places on those schemes.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes portfolio questions on net zero and energy, and transport. I apologise to members whom I was not able to squeeze in.

UK Covid-19 Inquiry Module 1 Report (Scottish Government Response)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a statement by Kate Forbes on the Scottish Government’s response to the United Kingdom Covid-19 inquiry module 1 report. The Deputy First Minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The Covid-19 pandemic affected every aspect of life in Scotland, and its impact continues to be felt. Today, as always, our thoughts are with those who lost loved ones. We understand that, in recognition of the loss, hurt and suffering of the people of Scotland and the wider UK population, we must learn from past events and make effective, practical and measurable improvements in pandemic planning and preparedness. It is vital that we take steps to be as prepared as we can be for the future.

In July last year, the UK Covid-19 inquiry published its report and recommendations in relation to module 1, which considered pre-pandemic resilience and preparedness.

The inquiry’s report sets out its findings in detail, as well as the changes that it considers necessary to improve whole-system civil emergency planning and response in the UK to ensure that we are better prepared for, and are able to respond to and recover from, future emergencies. The findings and recommendations in the inquiry chair’s report cover a range of matters including governance and organisational structures; engagement and collaboration; risk assessment, including capacity and capabilities; the development of cohesive strategies to prevent, reduce, control and mitigate the effects of future whole-system civil emergencies; the use of data and research; pandemic exercising; scrutiny, accountability and transparency; and how we support those who are most vulnerable to risks. We agree with the inquiry that changes are required in relation to those matters.

Scotland faces a range of significant risks, from pandemics to the impacts of our ever-changing weather. We must learn from past events and global best practice to ensure that we are prepared and ready. The changes that we have committed to will ensure that we are better prepared for future pandemics, that we are better prepared for, and are able to respond to, a range of risks and threats, and that we can improve and strengthen our resilience as a nation.

I am pleased that the Scottish Government has now published its response to the module 1 report and recommendations. Those affected by the pandemic, in particular those who bore some form of loss, have placed a great deal of trust in the Scottish Government, not just to take on the challenges that Covid-19 posed, but to be open about and accountable for our performance. That trust is of the utmost importance to the Scottish Government, and it has informed all our considerations of the chair’s findings and recommendations.

The report set out 10 overarching recommendations. Our response, which has been published online today, sets out our commitments for action and the timescales in which we aim to achieve them. We will provide regular updates to the UK Covid-19 inquiry to demonstrate our progress on the recommendations. My Cabinet colleague Angela Constance, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, has responsibility for civil contingencies and is already working across Government to deliver the changes that we need.

As we move forward, we must continue to work closely with our local, national and international partners to take the action that is needed to deliver on the inquiry’s recommendations. The changes that are needed to ensure our future preparedness cannot be made in isolation or by the Scottish Government alone, which is why, first and foremost, we are committed to working collaboratively with the UK Government. There has already been joint working with the UK Government and the devolved Governments of Wales and Northern Ireland to deliver a four-nations concept of operations and exercise plan for UK-wide whole-system civil emergencies. Those actions address the findings and recommendations that are outlined in the report. Recommendation 10 requires the UK Government to consult with devolved Governments to create a statutory independent body for whole-system civil emergency preparedness and resilience. We are committed to working together to ensure that any new body is able to deliver its function in a manner that respects the devolution settlement.

Our partners beyond Government are critical to delivering improvements on the ground, where the impact of emergencies is felt most starkly. We fully support the chair’s findings and recommendations regarding the vital role that is played by the voluntary, community and social enterprise sectors, and the role that they can play in building and maintaining our resilience. I pay tribute to the work of those organisations during the Covid-19 pandemic. Health boards, local government and Police Scotland, which are tasked with planning and responding to emergencies, were vital in the Scottish response. I also pay tribute to our communities and the third sector for the innovative and creative ways that they responded to the demands of the pandemic.

As set out in our national performance framework, the Scottish Government is committed, through our policies, to tackling persistent inequality. A more equal society is better able to prepare for, respond to and recover from civil emergencies.

Clearly, certain groups in our society are more susceptible and vulnerable to adverse shocks, and the pandemic not only introduced new inequality but exacerbated existing inequality.

We fully endorse the chair’s recommendations and will take action to improve how we identify, assess and address the potential impacts of whole-system emergencies on the most vulnerable in our society.

The UK inquiry chair has made clear her expectation that institutions take swift action to consider and implement her recommendations to ensure that changes are in place as quickly as possible. We endorse that approach, and I reassure the people of Scotland that we have not been waiting for the chair to publish before taking action on many of the issues that the inquiry raised.

In August 2021, the First Minister established the independent standing committee on pandemic preparedness to provide expert advice on future pandemic risks and how best to prepare for them. The committee provided its final report in November 2024, which covered a range of topics that are closely aligned to those in the inquiry’s report, including effective data sharing and usage; the integration of behavioural science; the improvement of connections between the academic and wider preparedness communities; and the establishment of a Scottish pandemic sciences partnership.

The Scottish Government has already accepted the committee’s recommendations in principle and will provide further details on our planned actions in due course.

We have made changes to embed the reforms in public services and the justice system that the pandemic necessitated. Improvements in the longer term were delivered via the Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Act 2022, which was passed in June of that year.

We have taken steps to increase and secure the types and levels of personal protective equipment items that are held in our national stockpile.

On 4 June 2024, Cabinet agreed to establish a new cross-Government governance arrangement for future pandemic preparedness. Our newly established ministerial oversight group, which is co-chaired by my colleagues the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, will meet for the first time in the coming weeks.

We have also commenced a programme of work to improve our risk assessment process, which better takes into account Scotland’s circumstances and characteristics, including the impact that risks might have on the most vulnerable in our society.

As part of its examinations, the Scottish Covid-19 inquiry, which Scottish ministers established in December 2021 and operates independently of the UK inquiry, will consider matters relating to pandemic planning and response. We will consider those findings when they are available.

Given the importance of transparency around the actions that we are taking to manage civil emergencies, we will also report to the Parliament every three years on the improvements that we make to emergency resilience and preparedness in Scotland. The first report will be laid before the Parliament in September of this year.

I reiterate the Scottish Government’s commitment to continue the highest standard of co-operation with both inquiries, because learning from them is vital.

I note my gratitude to those who are working on the UK and Scottish Covid-19 inquiries and those who have provided evidence to them. I am conscious of the immense responsibility that they hold, the enormity of the tasks that they face in understanding and distilling the events of the pandemic, and the important lessons for the future.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The Deputy First Minister will now take questions on the issues that were raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for that, 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.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

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

The Covid-19 report casts serious doubt on the ability of the Scottish Government to address key failings that occurred during the pandemic. One major concern is the lack of detail on how the Scottish Government plans to overhaul risk assessment and pandemic planning. The Scottish National Party needs to act decisively to update frameworks to respond to new threats and run regular scenario tests.

Transparency is another issue. Regular bedtime deletion of WhatsApp messages means that we will never know the reasoning behind centralised decision making and the lack of involvement of key stakeholders.

The pandemic exposed stark health inequalities affecting Scotland’s most deprived communities and those who are most vulnerable. Without clear leadership and meaningful reform, the SNP risks repeating past mistakes, leaving Scotland unprepared for the next crisis.

The Deputy First Minister talks about adopting a UK-wide strategy, but that sounds hollow given that Ms Lloyd, Nicola Sturgeon’s chief of staff, wanted

“a good old-fashioned rammy”

with the UK Government. While the rest of the UK was developing an NHS app, the SNP Government decided that Scotland would go its own way for the sake of being divergent. How can we avoid that divergence in future policy and continue to work in a four-nations manner?

We watched the relentless march of Covid across Europe and knew that vulnerable groups would be most affected, yet inadequate protocols were in place to protect them. What will the Scottish Government do differently next time?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I thank the member for that series of questions. I hope that, in time, as he re-reads our response to the chair’s report, he will see the way in which we have set out clearly our acceptance of the recommendations that have been made by the chair and the fact that we have attached clear actions and timescales to each of our responses.

The member made three particular points, one of which concerned pandemic exercises. Recommendation 6 talks about the need for there to be

“a UK-wide pandemic response exercise at least every three years.”

That is a direct quote from the chair’s recommendations; we are not suggesting that that is our response. We are committed to participating in the tier 1 national exercise programme, which seeks to exercise responses to a range of risks rather than just a pandemic, to make sure that we are prepared for any eventuality. I am sure that, as a practising GP, the member will know that those risks come in all shapes and sizes and that many of them are difficult to forecast.

The member mentioned risk assessment. Recommendation 3 calls for a better approach to risk assessment, and we have accepted that recommendation. We will continue to improve the approach to risk assessment, and we will take a joined-up approach with the other UK nations.

The member also suggested improvements on transparency, which is addressed in recommendation 8. We have accepted that recommendation in principle, and we have agreed to regular reporting. I have already set out the timescales for the first report, which will be laid this summer. Rather than wait indefinitely, we have set out a clear timescale, and we would expect Parliament to scrutinise that first report.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I welcome the fact that all four nations are working together to improve resilience and planning for future pandemics. Many lessons need to be learned, but I will focus on just three of them. First, I welcome the three-yearly reporting to Parliament. Given the lack of planning and scrutiny in the past with regard to the Silver Swan initiative, that will be a definite improvement.

Secondly, I think that the Deputy First Minister would acknowledge that trust is important and that, therefore, openness and transparency must be our watchwords. That must be more than just a principle; it must also be practice. So, can the Deputy First Minister tell me that the wholesale deletion of WhatsApp messages by ministers and civil servants, including John Swinney, will not happen again?

Thirdly, and finally, we know that risk assessments were not undertaken when the Scottish Government gave the green light for health boards to discharge untested patients into care homes, with the result that Covid-19 spread like wildfire among the most vulnerable. Can the Deputy First Minister assure the chamber that such actions will be fully risk assessed in the future?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

On the point about WhatsApp and the use of mobile phones, that is an example of how the Scottish Government has responded in advance of today’s statement. As the member will know, we have set out a new policy on the use of WhatsApp, which means that corporate devices will not be able to access it. As a result, and in response to the review by Emma Martins, we have set out a new policy for the use of mobile messaging.

The member also talked about the importance of health resilience, which is captured in the report and in our response to it. As I said, we have been taking a lot of steps to improve the resilience of our health system in order to deal with pandemics in the future. We have identified a number of points in our response to the inquiry’s chair, some of which relate to PPE supply, distribution and training. We are also looking to work with the UK Government on areas of joint surveillance, recognising that the 2011 UK pandemic flu plan was not fit for purpose. Those are just three examples of how we are ensuring that there is greater resilience across the health service and that the people in it are prepared and have the capacity to respond in the future.

I note that the member welcomed the commitment on reporting to Parliament. I think that it is important that we do that on a joint, UK-wide basis. That is precisely why all four nations are, I believe—unless someone corrects me—responding simultaneously this afternoon.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I advise the chamber that several members wish to ask their questions. To get as many in as possible, I need succinct questions and succinct answers to match.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

It is undeniable that there are profound lessons to be learned from the effect of health inequalities during the pandemic. Will the Deputy First Minister outline how those inequalities will be addressed as part of the public health planning that is being done in response to the evidence shown in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

Increasing healthy life expectancy and reducing health inequalities across Scotland is an ambition of the Government. We recognise that health inequalities in Scotland have widened in recent years due to several issues, particularly Covid-19. We are developing a population health framework that will take a cross-Government approach to improving the key building blocks of health, including population health, and reducing health inequalities. That issue is prevalent in the inquiry chair’s report and in our response to its recommendations.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The rapid development and deployment of technology during Covid was key to the management of the pandemic and demonstrated that Governments can be agile and active when the need arises. Despite that, the development of healthcare technology and telemedicine has fallen back into the slow lane. What will the Government do to ensure that the demonstrable benefits of technology deployment, including data gathering and sharing—especially in an emergency—are fully realised?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The member makes a very good point. Data is included in recommendation 5, as is “research for future pandemics”. We accept that recommendation and are fully committed to working with the UK Government to ensure that we have reliable data and research for future pandemics, both for Scotland and on a four-nations basis. We have agreed to that recommendation in full.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I thank the Deputy First Minister for her statement. Along with other members in the chamber, I acknowledge the comments that have been made about the people who lost their lives during Covid.

Scotland’s response to the pandemic included the third sector in many ways. As the Government has, in its statement, already committed to the significant improvements in pandemic preparedness in social care and health, what help will be given to ensure that our third sector, too, can rise to those demands?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

Clare Adamson is right to acknowledge the work of the third sector not only during the pandemic but in response to a number of the inequalities that were exacerbated then. I referenced their importance in my statement. We also accept that the work in relation to preparedness needs to go beyond the boundaries of Government, and we will continue to engage with the third sector and others in ensuring our preparedness for a further risk.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I welcome the four-nations approach that is being taken. For lessons to be learned, a collaborative approach is vital.

As the Deputy First Minister said, during the pandemic, certain groups in our society were particularly vulnerable, and Covid only exacerbated pre-existing inequalities. More work must be done on that. Can she assure Parliament that the Scottish Covid inquiry will investigate the issues around inequalities and bring to light the injustices that were felt by some of the most vulnerable in our communities? What timescale can we expect for that work?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

If I heard the member correctly, she asked for reassurance on what the Scottish Covid inquiry would do. As she will know, it is really important that the Scottish Covid inquiry be entirely independent of Government, so it would not be appropriate for me to determine or to guide the areas that it chooses to explore. However, I imagine that the issues that she has identified will inevitably be explored, because they are of such importance to our understanding of the impact through the inquiry.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

The Scottish Government has openly supported continued innovation in life sciences and public health research for the development of diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics, to provide the capability to respond to novel threats when required. Can the Deputy First Minister outline what investment will be made in that sector in the Scottish budget for 2025-26, and how it will benefit Scots across the country?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The member is absolutely right that life sciences are not only a critical driver of growth in our economy; they are potentially life saving, because they provide life-saving therapies and contribute significantly to that. In our programme for government, we set out measures to grow the sector, which currently contributes more than £10 billion to the economy and supports 42,500 jobs. As part of our enterprise package, we will continue to support innovative and high-growth companies that operate in the life sciences sector.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

This is the first module of 10 that will complete over the next few years. The inquiry is essential and it cannot be rushed, but the recommendations should be worked on at pace. I am grateful to the Deputy First Minister for setting out how that is being done at the moment. However, pandemics do not wait for us to complete work, learn lessons and then implement them before they happen. How confident is the Deputy First Minister that, if we were to have another pandemic in the short term, we would be ready, without the full learning from the inquiry?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

As the member said, we cannot afford to wait. In my statement, I set out a number of steps that we have already taken in advance of the chair publishing the report and of our response to the recommendations. I mentioned that the pandemic preparedness group that was established published its recommendations last year. Many of those recommendations are similar to those of the chair, and we have already made significant progress on those recommendations. Much of what we have responded to is already in train. The areas that require four-nations responses are probably the items that are new in this response.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am sure that members are reassured to learn that the Government will maintain an adequate stockpile of PPE. Will the Deputy First Minister reassure members that that stockpile will be refreshed so that no staff are opening out-of-date face masks and gowns in the event of another pandemic, and that we will use the time between pandemics—we must think of it in those terms—to ensure that there is an adequate mix of masks to fit all face types, genders and body types, so that we do not have a situation again in which a predominantly female workforce is unable to use face masks that are designed for men?