Scottish Parliament, 6 February 2025

295 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good morning. The first item of business is general questions.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government how reform across health and social care will progress, following the decision not to proceed with part 1 of the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill. (S6O-04298)

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

Last week, the First Minister announced plans to drive down waiting times and reduce pressure on front-line services, and our draft budget sets out almost £2.2 billion of investment in social care and integration.

We have revised our approach to the national care service. Parts 2 and 3 of the bill will go ahead, reforming information records and standards and introducing Anne’s law and the right to a break for unpaid carers. We will establish a non-statutory advisory board to drive improvement and ensure that services are consistent, fair and of high quality across Scotland.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The Edinburgh integration joint board is facing another budget gap in the financial year ahead, requiring gross savings of £51 million. The previous chief officer indicated that integration has not been functioning properly in Edinburgh, with issues dating back to when the Scottish Government established the Edinburgh IJB in 2015. In November 2023, the City of Edinburgh Council unanimously agreed a cross-party motion to review the integration scheme, but more than a year later, it has been alleged that NHS Lothian is pushing back against that review as the current scheme sees the council being required to continually bail out the IJB in Edinburgh. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that the integration scheme is working fairly for the city of Edinburgh and NHS Lothian?

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

As the member will be aware, decisions on funding the integration joint board when it was set up and annual decisions on funding, which comes from both the local authority and NHS Lothian, were and are for local leaders, and those leaders are democratically accountable to the local population. I am more than happy to look at how the integration scheme works; whether it is delivering for NHS Lothian; and, as the member has asked me to, whether it is working well for others. Efforts to look at that are in our programme for work, and I would be happy to pick that up.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

Change in social care is needed, and we must all work to secure improvement. I understand from the minister’s statement that was delivered earlier this month that a new non-statutory advisory board will be established to drive improvement in the sector. Will the minister advise when that board is expected to meet and how quickly it will be able to deliver vital reform?

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

We are moving quickly to establish a non-statutory advisory board that has lived experience at its heart. We expect the board to meet for the first time in March 2025, and it will be critical to the national care service’s efforts to drive improvement and ensure that services are consistent, fair and of high quality.

Strengthening national support and oversight of the system remains our core intention. Membership of the advisory board will include people with lived experience of accessing care services, unpaid carers, members of the workforce, care providers, trade unions, the national health service and local government. As I have set out a path forward that I believe that everybody is able to get behind, I expect the board to have an impact rapidly.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 2 was not lodged.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve NHS services in Dumfries and Galloway. (S6O-04300)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

It is for health boards and their planning partners to plan and provide services that best meet the needs of local people, including those in rural areas, in a way that is consistent with clinical best practice, national policies and frameworks. One example that Oliver Mundell might be interested in is that NHS Dumfries and Galloway was one of two boards to implement the new digital dermatology pathway last year, allowing patients to benefit from faster diagnostics and assessment of skin conditions. Once fully rolled out, the programme will impact 400,000 patients in Scotland over three years and reduce waiting lists by 36,000 hours.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

It is always good to hear positive examples but, clearly, services are under pressure, with a crisis in dental provision, challenges in the provision of primary care and worrying delays to hospital discharge. One patient in Dumfries and Galloway has been stuck in hospital for 916 days.

Although I accept that such cases can be complicated, surely the cabinet secretary agrees that that is unacceptable and that it drives growing fears among elderly constituents that if they go into hospital, they might not get back out again. What is the Scottish Government doing to investigate such cases, which are prevalent across Scotland? What is it doing to address the growing challenges around delayed discharge?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I do not know the detail of the case that the member raises, but on the face of it, I agree that it is unacceptable. With longer-term cases, such as the one that he has referenced, there is often complexity, but I am very clear that the current level of delayed discharge, particularly the considerable variation across different areas, is not acceptable.

As a result, the Government has been working with local health and social care partnerships and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to identify key challenges and barriers to hospital discharge, as well as identifying shared good practice to support improvements. The work includes the provision of more direct whole-system support to areas such as the Highlands and Dumfries and Galloway, which face the biggest challenges with delays.

I am confident that our collaborative work in that space will deliver improvement, but I know that more needs to be done to support it. That is why the 2025-26 budget includes a commitment of an additional £100 million in funding to tackle delayed discharge by, for example, further expanding the hospital at home service. If approved by the Parliament, that funding will support our ambition to grow the hospital at home service to 2,000 beds by December 2026. That would make it the biggest hospital in the country, and would help address hospital occupancy and delayed discharge issues.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Last week, the First Minister outlined that a greater proportion of new NHS funding will go towards primary and community care, and the cabinet secretary has just outlined greater collaboration and the hospital at home service as examples of that. Will the cabinet secretary say something more about how the 2025-26 budget will ensure that general practitioners and services in communities across D and G will have the resources that they need to play a greater role in our health system, including helping with delayed discharge?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Absolutely. Scottish Government officials are currently determining how best to allocate the additional funding for primary care to ensure that we realise the maximum benefit from that investment. The investment will be used for a range of initiatives, including to increase capacity in general practice and to make it more consistent across Scotland. It will deliver a new acute anterior eye condition service during 2025, which, with the community glaucoma service, will free up to 40,000 hospital appointments a year. We will also be expanding the pharmacy first service, so that more clinical conditions can be treated by pharmacists, and targeted investment in the dental workforce will improve capacity and patient access, with a review of existing incentives for rural practices.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

The rate of patients being seen within four hours at accident and emergency departments in Dumfries and Galloway is the worst on record. Although we understand the immense pressure that NHS staff are under, lack of capacity has led to treatment taking place in areas that are unsafe, inappropriate and undignified. Last week, I asked the cabinet secretary whether the Government would commit to publishing regular data on the care that is taking place in inappropriate settings, but he failed to address the issue of data altogether. I ask him again: does the Government intend to publish regular data on corridor care?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I accept the situation that Carol Mochan has set out with regard to the four-hour standard. We have rehearsed and discussed some of the issues that are driving that, including the hospital occupancy and delayed discharge issues that Oliver Mundell and Emma Harper have referenced. This morning, I met Colin Pullman, the executive director of the Royal College of Nursing, to discuss the RCN’s report on corridor care, and I committed to exploring further how we can, consistently, have a greater sense of what the picture looks like and, therefore, how we can address it.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to invest in the hospice care sector, in light of the £4 million referred to in the draft budget 2025-26. (S6O-04301)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

The draft budget for 2025-26 now includes £5 million of investment to support independent hospices to provide pay parity with national health service agenda for change levels. The aim of that is to support hospices to retain staff who deliver essential end-of-life and palliative care services. My officials are already undertaking work to explore the mechanisms for providing that funding, while respecting the roles of integration joint boards and local commissioning arrangements.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

I thank the minister for putting on the record that the draft budget includes £5 million for that. I note that that increase came about during budget negotiations.

On a recent visit to Strathcarron hospice, which provides invaluable end-of-life care for almost 500 patients and families in central Scotland, I was fortunate to speak to staff and learn more about the quite incredible work that they do. However, the chief executive told me that one of the challenges that it faces is Labour’s employer national insurance increase. That will put additional pressure on its budget, which is largely funded by donations. Although the increased budget commitment is hugely welcome, what update can the Scottish Government provide on a new national funding framework for hospice care in Scotland to help mitigate the longer-term impacts of Labour’s damaging policy?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Like Michelle Thomson, I have had the privilege of seeing the incredible work that independent hospices do—both personally and as a minister. I also recognise that Labour’s decision to increase employer national insurance has created huge pressure across the whole of the public and third sectors, including Scottish hospices. If that is not fully funded by the United Kingdom Government, it will pose risks to service delivery.

We remain committed to working with the hospice sector and IJBs to develop a new national funding framework that will support IJBs and independent hospices to agree sustainable funding, planning and commissioning arrangements to meet their local populations’ needs. We will be creating a partnership group to drive that work.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The fact is that the hospice sector is facing a double whammy of national insurance increases and meeting the agenda for change. The £5 million announced in the budget is welcome, but the sector is calling for £15 million to stand still. We know that £350 million is available in contingency funds in the Scottish Government’s NHS budget for the current financial year. If the issue is not addressed, hospices across Scotland—which are setting their budgets now—will see the disparity increase even further. Is the Scottish Government looking to provide the £15 million that the sector needs, and not just the £5 million that is currently in the budget?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I thank Miles Briggs for his question and recognise the work that he does in supporting hospices in his region and across Scotland. As I referenced in my previous response, we have been working closely with hospices to address the situation that has arisen—the double whammy, as Miles Briggs called it. We are creating a partnership group to drive that work, and I meet hospices regularly.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I welcome the additional funding, which was secured through the budget partnership and negotiations with the Scottish Liberal Democrats. However, the minister will be aware that the debate on my Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill has shone a light on gaps in access to palliative care. What assurances can she give that, through the palliative care strategy and additional funding, some of those access issues can be addressed?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I recognise the role that the Liberal Democrats played in ensuring that the hospices received additional funding. I agree that, in the light of the bill that Liam McArthur is taking through Parliament, it cannot be one or the other, which is why I am very pleased that we had our palliative care consultation, which closed in January. That is an important way of working to ensure that people in Scotland get the right options on end-of-life and palliative care.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported guidance issued by Rape Crisis Scotland, and its definition of the word “woman”. (S6O-04303)

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The Scottish Government is clear that the needs of survivors of rape and sexual assault must be the utmost priority of support services.

Although we cannot intervene in the running of independent organisations, we are clear that access to separate or single-sex provision for survivors is a legitimate and proportionate response when providing support to rape survivors. We therefore welcome the fact that Rape Crisis Scotland is currently consulting member groups and survivors to agree a clear approach to the matter within the terms of the Equality Act 2010.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

It was recently reported that Rape Crisis Scotland has dropped its pledge to define the word “woman”, after a series of scandals over the service’s embracing of gender ideology. That does not give reassurance to survivors of rape and sexual assault that the charity will be a safe, single-sex space for them. Does the minister agree that “adult human female” is the only appropriate definition of the word “woman”?

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

A woman is an adult female—that is clear. However, it is simply a fact that trans people also exist and have always done so. That is not new.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

I remind members that I am the convener of the cross-party group on funerals and bereavement.

To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to making bereavement education a formal part of the school syllabus. (S6O-04304)

The Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise (Natalie Don-Innes)

The curriculum for excellence includes health and wellbeing as one of three core areas that are the responsibility of all schools. Schools develop the curriculum to suit their local context and meet the needs of their pupils, which includes delivering learning on bereavement.

Education Scotland has developed teaching resources to raise awareness of childhood bereavement and the impact of adversity and trauma while helping to mitigate the effect of those experiences. Young Scot has also developed advice and resources for children who are dealing with bereavement. That work aligns with recommendations to improve support for children who are experiencing bereavement.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

Whether of a beloved relative or a pet guinea pig, all of us will face bereavement at some point. However, Cruse Scotland and other organisations have pointed out that there is still a lack of a core curriculum to help children learn how to deal with it. Will the minister meet me, Cruse and other organisations to discuss how we can take that forward to benefit children across Scotland?

Natalie Don-Innes

All children and young people who have experienced bereavement should be supported. As I have alluded to, and as Mr Balfour is aware, the curriculum for excellence is not a statutory curriculum but more a broad framework that is designed to give schools the flexibility that they require.

That being said, programmes are delivered in Scotland to support children and young people through grief and loss, such as the Seasons for Growth programme, whose core element is the promotion of social and emotional wellbeing after a loss.

We continue to work with Education Scotland to build on the work to date and to identify any gaps. I am aware of Cruse Scotland’s work in supporting children and young people, and I am happy to meet Mr Balfour to explore that further.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what the current average timescale is for non-criminal complaints against the police to be allocated for investigation by Police Scotland. (S6O-04305)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The Dame Elish Angiolini review recommended that the complaints and conduct committee of the Scottish Police Authority should hold Police Scotland to account for delays in investigations into complaints and misconduct.

Police Scotland reports on the average timescales for completion of complaints and the proportion of complaints that are completed within 56 days. It does not break those figures down to measure the time that is taken for the allocation of a complaint.

The Police Scotland professional standards department provides a quarterly report to the complaints and conduct committee and Mr Smyth can access a full breakdown of its performance on the Scottish Police Authority website.

Colin Smyth (Labour, South Scotland)

It is now routine that, when I write to Police Scotland on behalf of a growing number of constituents who have made complaints about Police Scotland but have heard little or nothing about that complaint—often after months and, in some cases, more than a year—the response is not only that there is no timescale for dealing with the complaint, but that Police Scotland cannot give a timescale for when a complaint will even be allocated for investigation.

When will that growing level of unacceptable waits be tackled? How can the public have confidence in the police if, when something goes wrong, the police do not seem interested in investigating that on time?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The statutory guidance is very clear that complaint inquiries need to be completed with a letter explaining the outcome. That has to be done within 56 days. I have listened very carefully to the member’s comments. I have also given a commitment to other MSP colleagues that I will raise the issue with the chair of the SPA when we next meet, as the SPA has responsibility for holding Police Scotland to account on such matters.

The most recent data that went to the SPA has shown a decrease in complaints year to year and in the five-year average. I will pick up the specific issues that the member has raised when I next meet the chair of the SPA.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes general question time.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The Scottish National Party Government previously told the public that it would cost £100 million to build the new HMP Glasgow. Yesterday, however, the SNP Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs dropped a bombshell on Scotland’s taxpayers—she admitted that it would now cost £998,400,000. That is just shy of £1 billion, and I will place a bet with John Swinney right now that it will only go even higher. Does a £1 billion Barlinnie really represent good value for Scotland’s taxpayers?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is essential that we replace HMP Barlinnie. We have numerous reports from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland that encourage us to do so. The Parliament has pressed us to undertake the project, and we recognise that it has to be done.

Of course, the full rigour of cost analysis has been applied to the project, which is different from the original project that led to the estimate that Mr Findlay set out. I assure him that the Government will monitor and control the costs carefully as the project takes its course.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I think that the First Minister’s undertaking is causing some anxiety among taxpayers, because it is they who are paying the price for this SNP incompetence and its perverse priorities. Instead of building a high-security prison to lock up rapists and murderers, John Swinney thinks that he is building either a luxury resort or a nature reserve. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Findlay.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The justice secretary says that it will be

“based around small communities living together and supporting each other.”

There will be an orchard of fruit trees, beautiful landscaped gardens, planting beds, polytunnels and amphitheatre-like steps. I am not making this up—there will be wee boxes for owls and bats to live in and special bricks for the birds.

The SNP expects hard-working Scottish taxpayers to pay for its nonsense. Surely we need some common sense by building a prison at minimum cost to taxpayers and not for maximum benefit to prisoners.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The tone of Mr Findlay’s question is absolutely reprehensible and despicable. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If Russell Findlay wants to have a dividing line in politics on this type of stuff, I will happily be on the other side of the argument from him and all the cohorts that he is courting with his question.

I want to make sure that there is a replacement prison so that those who are sentenced to prison can be held safely and securely and that staff are safe and secure in undertaking their responsibilities. That is my duty as First Minister, and that is what the Government will concentrate on delivering.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The cohort that I am talking to is hard-working Scots. It is taxpayers who want every single pound to be spent on the best possible schools and hospitals, not on the best possible prisons. This is baffling to people in the real world. They expect the Government to build functional prisons at a sensible price and to be kept safe from dangerous criminals, but they are getting neither from the SNP.

As a result of the SNP’s failure to build prisons on time and within budget, it will release thousands of criminals before they have done their time. Police Scotland officers and victims groups say that that will result in more crime in Scotland’s streets. One billion pounds and more crime—does that really sound like a good deal to John Swinney?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

This project is different from the one that was originally discussed about a decade ago. The original proposition was based on estimates for a 700-place prison. In fact, the new prison will accommodate more than 1,340 prisoners, so it will be almost double that size.

The Scottish Prison Service has looked at the comparative costs. A recent report by the National Audit Office shows that, in England and Wales, the expected cost per prison place has increased by up to 259 per cent since the initial business case. The price per place has risen to between £610,000 and £840,000 in England and Wales. The price per place for His Majesty’s Prison Glasgow sits in the middle of that range, at £740,000.

Mr Findlay can say all the things that he wants to say, and he can play to all the sentiments that he is very visibly playing to. However, as First Minister of Scotland, I expect my ministers to take rational decisions to protect the public purse and to protect the public by ensuring that those who are sentenced to prison can be accommodated. I will not play games with the type of rhetoric that Mr Findlay has put to the Parliament today.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

John Swinney is protecting the public purse, apparently. The prison has doubled in size but will cost 10 times as much—that is SNP economics right there. It is squandering more on a five-star prison than it spent on Scotland’s flagship Queen Elizabeth university hospital, and it is releasing thousands of prisoners early. At the same time, it is building a prison with boxes for bats and bricks for birds.

That illustrates how detached the Holyrood bubble has become from the real world, and it is why so many people are disillusioned with politics. The John Swinney Government is neglecting what really matters to people. As a matter of urgency, will he commit to cutting those outrageous costs, or will he just expect taxpayers to pipe down and pay up?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

All of us can see what Mr Findlay is up to today. [ Interruption .] All of us can see it. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is very visible what Mr Findlay is up to today. He is absolutely terrified of his party being consumed by Reform, as all the polls suggest, and he is playing into its hands with every bit of obnoxious rhetoric that he comes out with. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will reassure taxpayers, as they have—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Findlay has not balanced a single budget in his life for the public finances. I have balanced 10 budgets in this country and delivered value for money, and I will continue to do so.

I encourage Mr Findlay to go away and do his research. I have set out to the Parliament the issues that have arisen because of the significant inflation in construction costs with which we are wrestling. Why are we wrestling with those costs? We are wrestling with them because of the fiscal mismanagement of the Conservatives, including the Liz Truss budget and the higher interest rates that she bequeathed to us all, and Mr Findlay was right behind the mess that she created.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Today, the United Kingdom Government has announced plans to speed up the development of new nuclear power. It is obvious that the plan has the potential to bring billions of pounds of investment to communities, to jump-start growth and to create high-skill jobs, all while ending our reliance on dictators such as Vladimir Putin to meet our energy demands. Will John Swinney end the Scottish Government’s ideological block on nuclear energy to ensure that Scots also can benefit from that opportunity?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The best thing that we can do is to power on with our plans for renewable energy development and ensure that Scotland can realise the extraordinary natural resources that we have. I saw that being developed at the Methil yard in Fife yesterday in a collaboration between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government in securing investment from Navantia and securing the future of the workforce at Methil.

We should power on with renewables. That should be the clear policy signal from the Scottish Government.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

It is not an either/or. At 10 o’clock this morning, National Grid’s live data showed that 23.9 per cent of the electricity being consumed in Scotland was from nuclear energy. The transition to net zero is a chance to create decent, high-skill jobs for the future, drive investment into Scotland and secure our national energy security. The First Minister should just ask communities in East Lothian or North Ayrshire, which have seen the benefits, about that.

For almost 20 years, the Scottish National Party has vetoed nuclear energy projects in Scotland, leaving jobs, growth and skills to go elsewhere. However, the next generation of small nuclear reactors could revolutionise our energy market. China is constructing 29 reactors and the European Union has 12 at planning stage. That is a huge advantage in the global race to harness new technologies to deliver cleaner, affordable and independent energy. Why is John Swinney determined to let Scotland fall behind?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I spend a lot of my time, as I did on Tuesday, engaging with the Scottish energy advisory board and other energy interests in Scotland. One of the pleas that the energy advisory board has made to me, which I acknowledge is important and which I faithfully try to deliver, is to provide absolute policy certainty so that investors can invest in the technologies that come forward.

In 2023, 70 per cent of electricity generated in Scotland was from renewable sources. That is a marked increase compared to the 32 per cent in 2013. Mr Sarwar should be careful not to create the impression that renewable energy is not delivering formidably for Scotland, because it is.

I think that investors will be really worried by Mr Sarwar’s language. Investors tell me that they know exactly where the Scottish Government stands today. We are right behind the renewable energy revolution and we are delivering that. In his pursuit of the new direction, Mr Sarwar wants to muddy the waters. He wants to add uncertainty. He wants to scare off investment from the renewable energy industry. I will not do that. I will give a clear green light to the green energy revolution in Scotland and I will be proud of what Scotland can deliver.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I am talking about more investment in Scotland. John Swinney has the power to unleash billions of pounds of investment and new jobs with the stroke of a pen but, instead, he is trapped in the politics of the 1970s, wanting thousands of jobs—[Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister wants thousands of jobs and billions in investment to go to England and Wales rather than come to Scotland, all while weakening Scotland’s energy security. What kind of nationalist is he?

Let me set out a new direction that a Scottish Labour Government will take. We will end the ideological block to zero-carbon nuclear energy. We will kick-start economic growth and bring billions in investment into Scotland. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Members!

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

We will deliver thousands of high-skill, well-paid jobs for the future and boost Scotland’s energy security, all while delivering on Scotland’s ambitious climate change commitments. In the face of that huge opportunity, why are John Swinney and the SNP holding Scotland back?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not think that that is in any way, shape or form correct. The Deputy First Minister and I spent the evening yesterday with a number of investors who are investing in the renewables energy revolution in Scotland with the support of the Scottish National Investment Bank.

In my friend Mr Gibson’s constituency in North Ayrshire—Mr Sarwar mentioned North Ayrshire—we have just secured significant investment by XLCC in cable manufacturing, which will be absolutely critical for offshore renewables. That activity will be assisted by the investment by Sumitomo at Nigg that we have landed.

I encourage Mr Sarwar to go away and look at the cost issues in relation to nuclear power. If he thinks that the increase in costs in relation to HMP Barlinnie is one thing, his eyes will water when he sees the increase in costs in relation to nuclear plants that are taking their course in England.

Given the question that Mr Sarwar has put to me and the primacy that I attach to policy certainty, let me use this opportunity to make it absolutely crystal clear that the Scottish Government will continue with our support for the development of green renewables and that we will not give the green light to nuclear power stations in Scotland.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Rents across Scotland are skyrocketing. Tenants are paying the price while private landlords are lining their pockets. Although the Housing (Scotland) Bill will finally deliver the promise of permanent rent controls to fix the system, the provisions will not come into force until 2027. Right now, tenants are protected by temporary controls that were introduced while the Greens were in government, but those protections are set to expire in two months, which will expose tenants to extortionate rent increases. Despite having the powers to extend those protections, the Scottish Government has pledged not to do so. First Minister, will you do the right thing to protect tenants and ensure that those temporary protections are extended until permanent rent controls are in place?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Always speak through the chair.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the significance of the point that Lorna Slater puts to me. The temporary changes to rent adjudication come to an end on 31 March, when the arrangements will revert back to the existing legal requirements, which are based on market rent.

I am aware of the concerns that have been raised. We know that a longer-term approach is required on rental policy, which is why the Government has introduced provisions in the Housing (Scotland) Bill to support the introduction of longer-term rent controls when that is needed and justifiable. The Government will focus on ensuring that we get that legislation correct as we bring it through Parliament.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

The cost of living crisis for tenants has not gone away. Over the past 10 years, monthly rent for a two-bedroom flat in Edinburgh has more than doubled. Some tenants are already reporting spending more than 70 per cent of their income on rent. We agree on the need to provide for permanent rent controls in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, but the Government’s decision to scrap the vital bridging rent controls will give landlords free rein to hike rents for two years. It is absolutely no surprise that the Scottish Association of Landlords has called it “a very welcome announcement”. What does the First Minister have to say to renters who will be facing that cliff edge in just a few weeks’ time?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Most private tenants still have a right to seek a review of a rent increase if they consider it too high. I would, of course, encourage tenants who are concerned about a rent increase to apply for a review. In relation to other messages that I would share with tenants, I would indicate that the Government is investing more than £90 million in discretionary housing payments, which is an increase of £6 million on 2023-24 that has been facilitated by the welcome support from the Scottish Green Party—which I appreciate—for the Government’s budget. Those discretionary housing payments are in place to support tenants and to assist them in managing the costs that they face.

I assure Lorna Slater of the Government’s determination to make progress on the issue of rent controls. That is why we are legislating through the Housing (Scotland) Bill. With the welcome support of the Scottish Green Party for the budget, we are able to put in place the support through discretionary housing payments, which will be an essential part of our commitment to tenants.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on the Scottish Government’s work to keep the Promise, in light of the fifth anniversary of it being made. (S6F-03794)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am grateful to Rona Mackay for raising that important question on the fifth anniversary of the Promise. The Parliament made the Promise unanimously and we all have a duty to keep it.

Yesterday, I spoke with care-experienced young people at the University of Glasgow. I heard about the challenges that they have faced and about their hopes for the future.

We are making progress to deliver the Promise. We have seen a 15.6 per cent reduction, since 2020, in the number of children in care and more than £110 million of investment in whole family support, and nobody under 18 is now admitted to a young offenders institution.

I assure Rona Mackay and the Parliament that I am absolutely committed to delivering the improvements needed. I welcome the report by the oversight board, which is clear that, although there is more to be done, the Promise can be kept by 2030.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

That is a significant announcement and welcome news on the anniversary of the Promise. What does the Scottish Government hope and expect will be achieved through the £6 million increase in the whole family wellbeing fund that is being provided to children’s services planning partnerships? What improvements can we expect to see as a result of that funding increase from the Scottish National Party Scottish Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I indicated in my earlier answer, we have already invested more than £110 million through the whole family wellbeing fund programme. The funding transforms how families are supported so that they can get the right help at the right time for as long as they need it.

The additional £6 million of funding that Rona Mackay referred to is for children’s services planning partnerships and will be used to improve local support in a way that best meets the needs of the families and communities and that ensures that Scotland can keep the Promise. Examples of that work include the provision of community-based family support hubs, services to support pregnant women, holistic support for parents with mental health or substance issues, and welfare rights advice.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The whole family wellbeing fund has underspends right across the country. However, the oversight board’s report, published yesterday, was clear that the

“Explicit leadership and drive from Scottish Government and scrutiny bodies to articulate a clear set of principles, outcomes and milestones”

to ensure that the Promise is kept by 2030 has been severely lacking. The report included more than 10 critical shortcomings that needed urgent attention, including workforce shortages, financial instability for care leavers, inadequate focus, fragmented services, lack of co-ordination—the list goes on. Is it not the case that the Scottish Government simply lacks the courageous leadership needed to take the decisive actions to meet the Promise by 2030?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I assure Roz McCall that I have every intention, working closely with my minister Natalie Don-Innes, to provide all the necessary focus, leadership and impetus. In the programme for government that was published in September, the concept of whole family support was absolutely pivotal to the achievement of the Government’s highest priorities related to the eradication of child poverty. I want to make sure that the work that we undertake to improve the experience of care-experienced individuals is right at the heart of our agenda on eradicating child poverty and providing the best start in life for children and young people. I assure Roz McCall of the Government’s absolute determination to ensure that that is the case.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

The Promise oversight board’s report said that we are halfway between when we made the Promise and when we must keep it. However, we are not halfway to delivering on the Promise. One particular area of concern is the absence of a stable home, which, as the report highlights,

“increases the pressures on families and increases the likelihood of children in those families being taken into care.”

This week, a devastating report revealed that the number of children in temporary accommodation is at a record high. We, in this country, are in a dire situation in regard to that. What action is the Scottish Government going to take in relation to the number of children in temporary accommodation, which is a breach of the Promise and also a breach of children’s human right to accommodation?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I accept the importance of the point that Mr Whitfield puts to me. The Government is taking steps to reduce the number of children who are living in temporary accommodation. Indeed, in the statistics to which Mr Whitfield refers, across 20 local authority areas, councils have reduced the number of children in temporary accommodation.

However, it is not enough. That is why the Government has committed £768 million to invest in housing in Scotland in the forthcoming financial year. Increasingly, more of those resources are being applied to tackle void properties, for example, to make sure that those properties are available for families to occupy. In many local authority areas, that change in priority is already delivering better outcomes in which families have long-term accommodation.

There is a deadly serious point at the heart of Mr Whitfield’s question, which is that I can take the action that he wants me to take on housing only if the Parliament approves the budget. We all—every one of us—are committed, as a Parliament, to the Promise. Therefore, we have to take the necessary steps to make it happen, and we can take those steps only if we have the financial investment to do so.

I leave the point with Mr Whitfield to reflect on over the week-long recess that lies ahead that, if he wants to turn his rhetoric into reality, he should support the Government’s budget at stage 3 and ensure that the investment is made in housing. If he does not do that, it is just empty rhetoric from the Labour Party.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the Court of Session’s decision regarding the Rosebank oil field and the Jackdaw gas field. (S6F-03781)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is considering carefully the court rulings that were announced last week. Decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing and consenting are currently reserved to the United Kingdom Government. We have been consistently clear that the UK Government should approach those decisions case by case on a rigorously evidence-led basis, with robust climate compatibility and energy security being key considerations.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Our North Sea workers are being failed by the Labour Government and by this devolved Scottish National Party Government. The decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw is a hammer blow to the north-east. We will import more oil and gas instead of using our own resources and supporting our own workers.

A poll by True North shows that nearly three quarters of Scots back the North Sea oil and gas industry. Will the First Minister also back the industry and drop his disastrous presumption against new oil and gas production before more jobs are lost?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

What I will do is everything in my power to secure a just transition for everybody involved. We all realise that we will have to make a transition from dependence on fossil fuels, unless, of course, we are going to deny the climate crisis that we are facing. I, for one, am not going to deny the climate crisis.

I want to do everything that I can to support the transition for the workforce in the north-east of Scotland, just as I would like us to be in a position to do more to support the workers at Grangemouth who have been served with redundancy notices. I am deeply concerned by the lack of impetus that we have been able to secure, particularly in projects such as carbon capture and storage, which would provide such opportunities for the future of Grangemouth.

The Government will consider the court’s judgments. We will work with the oil and gas sector to manage the transition that lies ahead, because I want to ensure that we have a strong and prosperous future for those who are involved in oil and gas in Scotland and that we have a strong and prosperous future for the Scottish economy.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

We are in a time of huge international tension and an ever-increasing risk of trade tariffs. The First Minister mentioned energy security. Is not the best way to protect energy security here and in Europe to produce as much oil and gas as we possibly can—not least because, as I hope the First Minister will know, the Equinor plan for the development of the Rosebank field states that the carbon footprint will be half the level of the existing North Sea average? Given that it will be electrification ready, the carbon footprint could reduce to 3kg of carbon per barrel, which is 25 times less than the carbon footprint of fracked gas from the USA or Qatar. Which is better for the environment: producing our own oil and gas or helping Donald Trump?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

What I am interested in doing is ensuring that we manage the transition to net zero, because we cannot deny the climate crisis that we face. That will be the position that I adopt and observe, because the science tells me that that is the rational position for us to take. It will also dictate the approach that I take on energy policy and encouraging the move to sustainable energy security by the investments that we make in offshore renewables. Again, that is supported by the Government’s budget, which passed stage 1 on Tuesday, and is facilitated by outstanding interventions such as that from SGN in Methil, where there is a pilot project on using hydrogen as a replacement for gas in domestic power systems.

Scotland is leading the world on such innovation, and I am immensely proud of what our academic institutions and companies are doing to take forward that agenda. They will have the full support of the Scottish Government.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to address the reported shortage in clinical radiologists, which is projected to rise to 263 fewer posts than needed by 2028. (S6F-03787)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The work of radiologists is absolutely crucial in effective delivery of a wide range of services, including cancer diagnostics. I take this opportunity to thank the radiologist community across the country for their commitment on our behalf.

Our investment in the radiologist workforce over the past 10 years is evidenced by an almost 25 per cent increase in consultant radiologist numbers. We continue to invest heavily in radiology training, funding 192 speciality training places in clinical radiology, including 78 extra places that we have added since 2014, based on modelling of future workforce need.

Clinical radiology training programmes, which have been filled at 100 per cent in Scotland every year since 2013, enable doctors to train, and to enter the workforce following completion of training, which takes a minimum of five years.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

We know that outsourcing scans is a sticking-plaster approach that is favoured by the Scottish Government, but the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Radiologists say that there is a real need to train and recruit more radiologists if we are to have a sustainable service in the long term. The First Minister knows that the lack of radiologists results in increased waiting times for cancer diagnosis and treatment. The last quarter’s performance shows that the 31-day and 62-day targets were both missed yet again, which is worse than the previous quarter. The First Minister has been at the heart of this Government for the past 18 years, so can he explain to the people of Scotland why cancer waiting times are worse on his watch?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Again, it is turning out to be my obligation to try to put some of Jackie Baillie’s comments into their proper context. We are treating more patients with cancer on time, within both standards, compared with the same quarter 10 years ago—12 per cent more within the 31-day standard and 6 per cent more within the 62-day standard.

Jackie Baillie talked about the fact that the 31-day standard had been missed. The target is 95 per cent and the performance was 94.3 per cent. I accept that that is a missed target—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If anyone is remotely interested in hearing my answers, I am happy to give them.

I accept that we missed the 95 per cent target, but I want to reassure the public that the overwhelming majority of patients have been treated within the 31-day target. It is important that Jackie Baillie does not come here every week and spread alarm among the public when our staff are doing their level best to protect the public.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to general and constituency supplementary questions.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

Yesterday, 435 workers at the Grangemouth refinery in my Falkirk East constituency were given redundancy notices, and refining will cease at the end of June. Despite statements from the Prime Minister, and from the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, who promised to

“step in to save the jobs at the refinery”

and

“put hundreds of millions of pounds behind it”,

the UK Government has instead prioritised eight sites—none of which are in Scotland—for the likes of sustainable aviation fuel.

I understand the need to transition, but the “just” in just transition has turned into “just wait” for the workers, the wider cluster and the community. Will the First Minister join me in condemning the United Kingdom Government for its lack of action? Will he set out what specific steps the Scottish Government is taking right now to support the workers and ensure that there remains a skills cluster from which to transition?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand entirely the concerns of Michelle Thomson, who has tenaciously spoken on behalf of her constituents in Grangemouth. I pay tribute to her for what she has contributed to the debate on their behalf. I understand her frustration at the lack of an immediate solution, which the Labour Party promised at the election. Indeed, Anas Sarwar stood beside me in an STV debate and made that very promise, and it has not been fulfilled.

When I last met the Prime Minister, I was clear with him on the need to support and retain the highly skilled workforce at Grangemouth. I am becoming increasingly impatient about the fact that no decision has been taken to award the Acorn carbon capture and storage project to Grangemouth. I was assured by the most recent Conservative Government that it would be the case that such a decision would be taken. The matter has not been taken forward by the Labour Government.

If there is an interest in trying to fulfil the United Kingdom Government’s commitment that it would intervene to act in Grangemouth, I urge the UK Government, as a matter of priority, to authorise the Acorn carbon capture project and to give certainty to the workers in Grangemouth.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

The Scottish National Party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, lobbied the Scottish Government on behalf of the renewables company Flotation Energy, which was awarded consent for a project. Thirty days later, Stephen Flynn received a £30,000 donation from a director of that company.

Today, we find out that, behind closed doors, SNP ministers had “real concerns” about the process for the awarding of the contract and questioned whether the assessment had been rigorous enough. The Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy was given the final 217-page document at just before 2 o’clock in the morning, and she signed off on it at just after 9 o’clock in the morning.

The secrecy and the lack of transparency are shocking, and something at the heart of the process stinks. Does John Swinney not realise how dodgy this looks?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The First Minister can answer on matters for which he has general responsibility.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The concerns that the cabinet secretary raised were about the time taken for the decision-making process as a consequence of Government scrutiny. The minister expressed her concern that the Government had to speed up its decision-making processes in that respect. That has happened as a consequence of the actions that ministers have taken in the intervening period.

I am struck by the fact that, on 23 April 2024, one of Mr Hoy’s colleagues said that consent times were

“a huge issue”

for offshore wind farms, and he called on the Scottish Government

“to streamline the necessary regulatory and administrative processes, to expedite the approval and implementation of offshore wind programmes”.—[Official Report, 23 April 2024; c 6.]

Those were the words of Douglas Lumsden MSP as they appear in the Official Report of the Scottish Parliament.

I suggest that the Scottish Conservatives decide whether they want to have projects delivered timeously or whether they want to get in the road. Either way, the Conservatives look as though they are in their usual muddle today.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016, which was passed overwhelmingly by this Parliament, helped to extend the community right to buy to the compulsory purchase of land or a building for the purposes of sustainable development.

In Fife, a group of local residents is struggling to get a ministerial decision on its part 5 right to buy application of 31 October 2023. The building that the group is trying to purchase, which is a 200-year-old building at the heart of North Queensferry, is in an increasingly derelict state, and the delay is causing it further harm. The recent storm has made that much worse. The residents wish to restore the building to serve the local community, but they are struggling to get a response from the community land team. Will the First Minister agree to look into the matter and find out why, to date, there has been no progress?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am not familiar with the case, but I understand that Shirley-Anne Somerville, as the local member, has met the responsible minister, Mairi Gougeon, to discuss the issue.

Let me take away the point that Mr Rowley has put to me. I understand the community’s aspiration to acquire the asset and to be able to utilise it for community benefit. I know from my constituents’ experience that such things sometimes take longer than they should. Indeed, I have just been wrestling with the issue of things sometimes taking too long.

Let me do what I can to help Mr Rowley, because I understand the significance of the point that he has raised. I will write to him with an update as a consequence of my inquiries.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

The First Minister will be aware of the news this week that a fatal accident inquiry is to be held into the death of Coatbridge resident Jacqueline McQuillan at Monklands hospital in 2018. Since that time, my office team and I have been supporting the family, and Jacqueline’s sister, Lynne, in particular. They are my constituents, and I know how important the announcement is for them in their on-going search for answers.

I know that the First Minister cannot comment on the specifics of the case, but will he join me in acknowledging the difficult time that the family has been through and in calling on the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to keep the family fully up to date as the case progresses?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I welcome Mr MacGregor’s point. He acknowledges that I cannot comment on the substance of the case, because it is live, but I assure him that the Crown Office has made significant improvements in its engagement with families in recent years, as is reflected in its family liaison charter. I fully expect that the family involved in this tragic case will get the support that they require. If there are any concerns about that, I know that Mr MacGregor will faithfully raise them with the Lord Advocate on behalf of his constituents.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

I have spoken time and time again in this chamber about the horrors of violence and abuse in our schools. Yesterday, staff at Kirkintilloch high school, in East Dunbartonshire in my region, went on strike because of a culture of abuse and violence from pupils. Violence against pupils and school staff has got out of hand and our schools are no longer safe. That shocking situation is a direct result of the Scottish National Party’s weakening of Scotland’s justice system and failure to protect pupils and teachers. When will the First Minister’s Government finally get a grip of the situation?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Everyone who goes to school, whether they are a member of staff or a pupil, should be safe, and it is incumbent on every local authority in the country to ensure that our schools are safe. For some children, school will be the safest place they can go to because of the challenges that they face elsewhere in society.

This is a vital priority. As Pam Gosal will know, I hosted a cross-party summit on 13 January, which involved her colleague Sharon Dowey, to explore some of the issues around youth violence. I will always take such questions seriously, but I do not want the impression to be created that our schools are anything other than safe. I also do not want any impression to be created other than that the vast majority of young people across Scotland do not engage in violence and that they attend safe and stable schools.

If there is an issue in a particular school, let us address that, but let us not characterise every single school in the country in the fashion that Pam Gosal has done, because that does not serve anyone’s interests, and it certainly does not serve the young people of our country.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

On 30 January, Cumbernauld theatre staff, the theatre’s supporters and the wider community were relieved when it was announced that all organisations currently funded by Creative Scotland would secure significant additional multiyear funding. However, that relief turned to heartbreak when they were told that that would not be the case for the theatre, that they had missed out on core funding and that the theatre was the only arts organisation that had been funded previously but was now losing support. I am told that that is due to a technical issue—the supporting evidence that they provided was too extensive.

To add insult to injury, the theatre also failed to receive any support from the newly created development stream, with Creative Scotland deciding that Cumbernauld theatre is not of strategic importance, despite its fantastic new facilities and despite the fact that Creative Scotland itself has praised those facilities and the work done by the theatre for decades.

Does the First Minister agree with Creative Scotland that Cumbernauld theatre is not of strategic importance? Will his Government urgently review that devastating funding decision?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am well aware of the case and have discussed it with Jamie Hepburn, the local member, in the course of this week.

Such decisions are taken by Creative Scotland, which works independently of Government, as the law requires. Creative Scotland makes those decisions in line with the criteria that it has set out. I understand that there is to be a meeting next week between the chief executive of Creative Scotland and Cumbernauld theatre to consider the issues.

I recognise the enormous disappointment that will be experienced in Cumbernauld. However, Mr Griffin must accept that there is not parliamentary support for the Government to intervene in Creative Scotland’s decision making, because Parliament has determined that Creative Scotland should be able to take those decisions for itself.

I hope that there is a constructive conversation that can find some way of resolving the issue. Among all the other decisions that have been taken, the content of the Government’s budget has given an absolutely colossal boost to culture and the arts in Scotland. There is a real improvement in the funding that is available, and I am glad that that has been able to be felt across communities the length and breadth of our country.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The latest figures show Scotland reaching a major milestone with more than 10,000 patients across Scotland benefiting from da Vinci robot-assisted surgery since 2021. I was introduced to robotic surgery, including early da Vinci models, when I worked in an operating theatre in Los Angeles in the early 2000s. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact of surgical robots on national health service productivity? Can the First Minister say any more about the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to support the delivery of robot-assisted surgery in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The approach is obviously having a beneficial effect given the number of procedures that are being delivered through it. To ensure that we have robust data and to allow us to better identify how robot-assisted surgery can be used across the national health service, we have commissioned Public Health Scotland to audit the experience. That data will be vital in ensuring that we can continue to scale up, drive equitable access and maximise patient benefit.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Can you advise the Parliament whether Scottish ministers have approached you and asked to make an urgent statement on the developing situation at the Grangemouth refinery? Frankly, it is just not good enough that Scottish ministers sit in this chamber and engage in a blame game when there is serious work to be done to secure jobs and the local economy in Grangemouth.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Mr Kerr. I confirm that I have not been approached, but you will be aware that you can raise the issue with your business manager and that such matters can be addressed by the Parliamentary Bureau.

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

Alcohol Use Disorder in the Justice System

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-15657, in the name of Elena Whitham, on a report on alcohol use disorder in the justice system. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes the publication of the Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems’ paper, Alcohol (In)justice: Position on people with an alcohol use disorder in the justice system; is concerned that it is estimated that almost two-thirds, 63%, of people in prison have an alcohol use disorder, with almost half of those, 31%, possibly dependent on alcohol; is further concerned that the risk of death from alcohol causes is three times higher in men and nine times higher for women who have been in prison than for the general population; understands that the paper sets out why and how people with alcohol use disorders who come into contact with the justice system should have the best opportunities to access treatment and support, and that this could reduce reoffending and pressures on the justice system, tackle inequalities, improve the health and lives of the people concerned and the lives of their families and wider communities; believes that there are examples of innovative practice across Scotland, including Glasgow’s Alcohol Court; acknowledges that the paper further sets out several potential standards that could be implemented across the justice system, and understands that accountability for such standards is required in order to make a difference to the health and lives of people in Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley and across Scotland with alcohol problems who are being dealt with by the justice system.

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

I thank colleagues from across the Parliament for supporting my motion, which has enabled me to bring to the Parliament’s attention the recent report “Alcohol (In)justice—Position on people with an alcohol use disorder in the justice system” by Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems. I welcome representatives from SHAAP to the chamber.

The play on words in the title of this critical report is in itself a lightning rod that we should all be coalescing around. Alcohol is a recurring feature in our justice system and the link between alcohol and crime is well understood. That, in turn, highlights the injustice that is faced by many when alcohol use disorder impacts on the individual, the family and their community.

Inequality is at the heart of the issue, and the human cost is staggering, but it goes wider than that—it impacts on all public services, and the cost to the public purse is considerable. Repeated interaction with the criminal justice system, driven and exacerbated by alcohol use, creates impacts that ripple through every area of life, such as repeated contact with police and courts, repeat periods of incarceration, repeat homelessness, social work interventions, loss of employment or employment opportunities and poor health that results in increased need for national health service interventions, including costly unscheduled care.

I believe that the case for change that is set out in the report is clear. The number of people with alcohol use disorders in our Scottish justice system is disproportionately high compared with the figure for the population at large and, although we are working hard on our imprisonment rate, we still have the highest rate in western Europe. We know that 63 per cent of people in prison have an alcohol use disorder, with 31 per cent of those individuals possibly being alcohol dependent. The risk of death from alcohol causes is three times higher in men who have been in prison, and a staggering nine times higher for women who have been in prison, than it is for the rest of the general population.

If we consider adverse childhood experiences and trauma, we find that 25 per cent of people in Scottish prisons are care experienced, 47 per cent have experienced physical abuse in childhood, and around a third lived with someone who was a problematic drinker during childhood. Inequality and disadvantage are pervasive in the justice system. I saw that over and over again when I worked in front-line homelessness services.

If we think in resourcing terms, we find that the overall estimate for the yearly cost to public services of alcohol-specific and alcohol-related offences is between £462.5 million and £991.7 million, with a midpoint of £721.1 million. It is important to note that those figures have not been re-estimated since 2007-08 and that the true figure is likely to be much higher.

The SHAAP report calls for a system that truly integrates health and justice; that provides treatment options and community disposals instead of incarceration, where appropriate; and that offers support at every stage of an individual’s journey, from arrest to sentencing and beyond. That is not just a humane approach—it is an effective one.

We know that addressing the root cause of problematic alcohol use through targeted interventions can reduce offending and lead to better outcomes for individuals and for society as a whole. However, the reality is that the 2019 Scottish prisoners survey showed that

“only 22% of participants reported that they had been given the chance to receive treatment for an alcohol use disorder during their sentence.”

The survey also revealed that

“40% of prisoners involved reported being drunk at the time of their offence”

and that nearly

“one fifth ... of prisoners who took part in the survey were worried alcohol would be a problem ... when they got out.”

Encouragingly, however,

“Forty one percent of participants said that if they were offered help for their alcohol use disorder (both inside and outside of prison) ... they would take it.”

The key recommendations from SHAAP that are outlined in the report are that, at each stage of a person’s interaction with the justice system, alcohol issues should be recognised, properly assessed and acted on, with key agencies having accountability. Accountability is key. In police custody centres,

“There should be a standard in place for the identification and treatment of people with an alcohol use disorder ... for the police and NHS ... staff.”

That would include referral to healthcare or addiction services, appropriate tools being used for alcohol use screening and appropriate actions being taken, including alcohol brief interventions or arrest referral for alcohol treatment and support.

The report says that, for alcohol brief interventions in justice settings,

“delivery sits at about 29% in prison and 3% in police custody”.

Those figures urgently need to rise. Those who are identified as needing support should be flagged so that their support needs are known throughout their journey in the criminal justice system. If fulsome information was provided on the standard prosecution report, that would also help to support the procurator fiscal when looking at suitability for diversion from prosecution.

We know that referrals to drug and alcohol specialist treatment have fallen in Scottish prisons in recent years, and work is under way by Public Health Scotland to understand why that is the case. That is part of wider work on overall reductions in referrals to alcohol services in general. The Scottish Government is also working on a national service specification for alcohol and drugs. That represents an ideal opportunity to publish a clear specification for justice settings, as well as to develop standards for alcohol treatment and support at each stage of the justice system, which will help to embed treatment and recovery communities across the justice sector.

Recent broader approaches to justice, such as Public Health Scotland’s health and justice programme strategy and the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023 demonstrate that there is a will to change, but the separation of powers and the independence of decision making between the organisations and bodies that are involved in the justice system can pose a challenge for the overall co-ordination of care and support. We need enforceable standards with clear lines of accountability so that those recommendations can be implemented and so that people do not continue to fall through the cracks.

Planning for release should happen when someone arrives in custody, so that we can ensure that they have been linked with recovery services and support as well as housing and welfare provision well ahead of their release. We should also seek to maximise the role of recovery communities and Alcoholics Anonymous, which can help people to work through those issues. Reports suggest that, with consistent access to AA meetings, attendees have reduced cravings, stronger coping strategies and improved engagement with other rehabilitative programmes. Participants who continue with AA after release credit it with helping them to secure employment, rebuild family relationships and remain sober in the community.

The same can be said when people are proactively linked into recovery communities once they have returned home. When I was a minister, I was privileged to visit the Glasgow drug and alcohol courts and watch them in action. I was mightily impressed by the problem-solving attitudes of those sheriffs and their shared desire to drive systems change. I also spoke to other sheriffs right across Scotland who shared the problem-solving ethos and a desire to understand what drives offending and what interventions, diversions and community justice disposals could deliver better outcomes.

That attitude must become the default if we want to sever the link between alcohol and crime. It is not soft justice—it is smart justice. I look forward to hearing from colleagues across the chamber and from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, who I know is as passionate about the issue as I am.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I am pleased to speak in this important debate, and I thank my colleague Elena Whitham for securing it. I congratulate her on her long-standing commitment to tackling the problem of alcohol and drug abuse and thank her for her customary informative and inspirational opening speech.

Alcohol abuse and addiction is a significant and pressing issue in the justice system in Scotland—indeed, the rate is disproportionately high. Almost two thirds—63 per cent—of people in prison have an alcohol use disorder, with almost half of those possibly dependent on alcohol. The risk of death from alcohol causes is three times higher for men who have been in prison and nine times higher for women who have been in prison than for the general population, as Elena Whitham articulated. All deaths due to alcohol are a tragedy but, as convener of the cross-party group on women, families and justice, that statistic really concerns me.

It is estimated that as many as 90 per cent of women in custody in Scotland have addiction problems, whether that involves alcohol or drugs. It is further estimated that 80 per cent of women in prison have brain damage due to head injuries that have been caused by domestic violence, and that a similar number suffer from mental illness to some degree. Whether those women should be in prison at all is for another debate, although I am certain that we should have that debate soon. I submit that prison is entirely the wrong place for women whose addiction and chaotic life experience have led them down the wrong path.

I am grateful to SHAAP for its research, which shows that, of the 12,000 people who had community payback orders imposed in 2021-22, only 1 per cent received alcohol treatment as part of their order. I know that there can be complex reasons for that but, on the face of it, we must do better. Forty per cent of prisoners reported that they were drunk at the time of their offence, and almost one fifth were worried that alcohol misuse would be a problem for them on their release. However, 41 per cent said that, if offered help for their alcohol use, inside or outside prison, they would take it.

In addition, people with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, which is an entirely preventable condition, are overrepresented in the justice system. Turning Point Scotland, which is an excellent third sector organisation, delivers a range of harm reduction approaches in relation to problematic alcohol use across our services. It believes that its programme of harm reduction should be incorporated into the justice system to help identify and act on a risk of alcohol-related harm. Time does not allow me to detail the organisation’s initiatives, but it is well worth having a look at its excellent website.

To an extent, people coming into the justice system provide an opportunity to recognise and, crucially, address alcohol use disorders by offering treatment and support. Alcohol brief interventions, which Elena Whitham mentioned, are a good example of that approach, but that could be strengthened through more consistent delivery and by improving options for diversion to appropriate services.

It is abundantly clear that alcohol misuse disorders in the justice system are a significant problem that has been overlooked for too long. Our prisons are overcrowded, and hard-working prison staff are dealing with a multitude of problems. A targeted programme of support and of treatment for alcohol abuse—of course, that should include prevention in wider society, where Scotland’s drinking culture has been a long-standing problem—should be available to reduce the pressure on our justice system.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I am pleased to be able to contribute to this afternoon’s important debate, and I thank Elena Whitham for bringing it to the chamber.

How alcohol use disorders interact with the Scottish justice system is still not very well understood. Elena Whitham’s motion lays out the key statistics, including the fact that nearly two thirds of people in prison have an alcohol use disorder. However, this issue goes beyond mere numbers. Far too much of the current legislation on the problem focuses entirely on alcohol use in prisons. In reality, alcohol use disorders affect individuals who are at all stages of the justice system. That includes during initial police contact, in custody centres and court settings and during liaison and diversion and throughcare.

It is clear that the current approach to alcohol and drug use is not working in prison settings. At His Majesty’s Prison Glenochil in Clackmannanshire in my region, 35 inmates were found to be under the influence of drugs on Christmas day. Although prison staff reportedly seized the articles that were causing the problem, the indication is that the issue is far reaching, so it is only fair that drugs and alcohol be considered when we are dealing with situations in our prisons.

The Scottish Prison Service was forced to introduce a policy to deal with influences on individuals as a result of that incident, but it is only one example of the disruption that can be caused in prisons and to the wider system. The Scottish prison healthcare network previously published guidance on the misuse of drugs in prisons and in custody settings; unfortunately, that guidance is no longer in use, and our prisons are often worse off as result.

As members from across the chamber will agree, further action is needed to tackle the attitude to alcohol in the wider justice system. Today’s motion mentions the solutions that are being created to support individuals who require treatment in the justice system, but it is disappointing that some approaches are not being considered. More guidance might need to be ascertained from the cabinet secretary in that respect, and I look forward to hearing about that in her summing up.

The Scottish Government is in the process of creating a national service specification for alcohol and drugs services, following the publication of UK-wide alcohol treatment guidelines. That could provide an opportunity to ensure that effective standards are in place in the justice system as a whole. I hope that, in summing up, the cabinet secretary will give an update on the Scottish Government’s progress on that, because it is a complex issue that requires bold solutions.

We have heard about the number of individuals—men, in particular—who were drunk during their offending, about the number of women who have suffered as a result of alcohol-related domestic abuse and violence and about the number of individuals in our custody and our systems who are suffering. That should have an impact on what we do.

I hope that, in tackling the issue, the Scottish Government will follow the advice and evidence from other areas on how to manage it. The justice system needs to be equipped to support hard-working staff with the tools that they need to do their job effectively, to support themselves and to support those going through the justice system.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank Elena Whitham for securing this important debate and congratulate her on her speech, which sets out the direction that we should all support in Scotland. I am very supportive of the motion, and I welcome SHAAP to the public gallery.

Excessive drinking of alcohol poses a significant public health challenge globally. However, the Scottish culture of high alcohol consumption levels and binge drinking has created what can only be described as a crisis. We need to be honest about that if we hope to reverse the current trajectory and help people, families and communities. It is our responsibility in this Parliament to do what we can to support those communities.

Office for National Statistics figures released only yesterday reveal that alcohol-specific deaths in Scotland have reached a 15-year high and that our country continues to have the highest rate of alcohol deaths in the United Kingdom. As we have heard from Elena Whitham, inequality is embedded in Scotland, so some of the problems with alcohol feel almost built into the lives that people are going to have. We have to be honest about that and seek to change that direction.

Although rates have remained steady compared with 2022, Scotland still has some of the highest rates of alcohol-related harm in Europe. Not only does harmful drinking impact people’s physical and mental health, but, as we have heard, it has a profound antisocial impact and can be detrimental to individual and societal wellbeing. It affects us all, so it is the responsibility of all of us to do something.

We are here today because, as we have heard, there is a strong link between alcohol and criminal behaviour. The “Alcohol (In)justice” report, which we are discussing today, expertly highlights that and provides crucial insight into the extent to which alcohol can fuel violence and criminality, and how we can respond to that.

As we have heard, the number of people with alcohol use disorders is disproportionately high in the Scottish justice system, compared with the rest of the population. A reported 63 per cent of people in prison have an alcohol use disorder, and almost half of those people are possibly dependent on alcohol. The report also highlights findings from the 2019 Scottish prison survey, which found that 40 per cent of prisoners who were surveyed

“reported being drunk at the time of their offence”.

The link between harmful drinking and criminal behaviour is clear. I emphasise that we must work together not only to provide better support for those who are suffering from alcohol problems, but to tackle the root causes of alcohol dependency and alcohol use disorders. It is important that we take that public health approach. By offering treatment and support to people who come into contact with the criminal justice system, we can do some of that work and provide individuals with the opportunity to recognise and address alcohol use disorder.

I have heard a little about the Glasgow alcohol court, which I hope to visit at some point. I hope that the cabinet secretary will agree that some of its positive approaches, which we have heard about, are useful. Intervening in that way would not only improve the health and lives of the individuals affected; it has the potential to reduce reoffending rates, thus helping to alleviate the immense pressures that we feel across Scotland and in the justice system.

Economic and social disparities are also prevalent factors in an individual’s choice with regard to alcohol, as I and others have mentioned. We know that the risk of alcohol-related harm is greater for those who are most disadvantaged in our society. It is important to make the point that they are often the people who are very hard to support; they do not readily come forward to services, and therefore we have a responsibility to go to them and see what we can provide.

I welcome the steps, such as minimum unit pricing, that the Government has taken to address alcohol harm. However, does the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs agree that we need to do some cross-portfolio work on this matter? I have asked the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health for an update on the delivery of alcohol market reform. If we work together on those issues, we might see beneficial outcomes.

I am aware of the time, so I will close there. I thank members for their contributions, and I particularly thank Elena Whitham for securing this important debate today.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I, too, thank Elena Whitham for raising this report in the Parliament. I know how important the issue is to her and how much work she has done to tackle harmful alcohol and drug use. The Parliament will be poorer for losing her insightful and empathetic contributions.

The statistics in the report speak for themselves: almost two thirds of people in prison have an alcohol disorder and the best part of a third are possibly dependent. However, many of them are willing to take help. That is the important point, because, as we have just head from Carol Mochan, that is not always the case. A huge opportunity has been presented to us to support those people.

There is undoubtedly an issue with stigma that will drive not only addiction but the severity of addiction in those who are in prison or who are reintegrating into society afterwards. Some of the rhetoric that we heard during First Minister’s question time is unlikely to help matters. Trying to make prison as punitive as possible will not reduce prison numbers or crime, and it will not make the lives of victims, families or anyone else any better. As Elena Whitham put it,

“It is not soft justice—it is smart justice.”

It serves absolutely nobody to keep people stuck in a cycle of addiction and crime, when we know what is causing it.

We have a lot to learn yet about addictions and about the societal impact both ways—in other words, how the negative impacts of the treatment of people with addictions are felt not only by that person but by all of us. Failing to support people costs us money and time, and it costs us fellow members of society who could be more functioning, happier and active contributors to our communities, rather than likely to return to prison after they are released.

On my recent visit to HMP Inverness, I was struck by comments from prison officers, who said that they really get to know a lot of their prisoners; they get to build trust, and they understand and see the cycle that many people are caught in. They see how the poor treatment and judgment that those whom they have supported inside often go on to receive outside, even from those who should be offering them support, make them far more likely to return to the behaviours and the people who led them to their convictions in the first place. Unable to get the support that they really need, they return to the harmful support networks that they are used to, and they return to alcohol and drugs and to committing more crime.

We heard from Elena Whitham that people’s experiences, disadvantage and trauma often seem to write their future for them. It is clear from the report that people are suffering something that they have no control or influence over. When people are in the justice system, we have the opportunity to recognise the high likelihood of their developing illness and to give them preventative treatment inside. There is no excuse for somebody who is dependent on alcohol and who is in the justice system not to have that dependency addressed.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I pay tribute to Elena Whitham for securing this important debate. She brings to every debate that she participates in or leads her insight, her experience and her eloquence in advocating for the causes that she champions. She is quite correct to talk about the pervasiveness of inequality in our justice system and for the people whom we seek to serve and rehabilitate for the safety of our communities.

We should remember that, although we must have a real focus on every step and stage of the justice system and on what we can do differently to divert people and to support them to turn their lives around, we must also focus on what happens upstream in health, education and other public services. As Carol Mochan said, it must be cross-portfolio work.

I am grateful to all members who have participated in the debate. It has been a measured and thoughtful debate, and I hope that we can take its spirit forward as we continue to wrestle with our high prison population, for example.

Emma Roddick spoke powerfully about how we need to have a different debate—a mature debate that, ultimately, focuses on what will work to help people to turn their lives around and to make our communities safer.

Rona Mackay asked the fundamental question on our use of custody, in respect of which we have a lot of questions to ask as well as to answer.

Alexander Stewart spoke about the importance of standards and of those standards being applied consistently across the system.

I am grateful to Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems for what I consider to be a very well-thought-out position paper, and I welcome the SHAAP representatives who are in the public gallery. I would be happy to meet Ms Whitham along with SHAAP, as well as Ms Minto, if that would be of assistance.

It is worth repeating the core statistics that Ms Whitham and others have narrated from the important SHAAP report, including that two thirds of people in prison have an alcohol use disorder. That certainly gives me, as the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, a mandate for action. When we read that the Scottish prisoner survey, as others have outlined, found that 41 per cent of prisoners said that they would accept help for their alcohol disorder but that only 22 per cent said that they had been offered help, it is clear that action is required across portfolios.

The inequality in the prisoner population—men who have been in prison are three times more likely, and women who have been in prison are nine times more likely, than those in the general population are to die as a result of their use of alcohol—speaks to the need for the strength of the actions that we have taken through the women in custody strategy. Those actions include the establishment of community custody units—one in Glasgow and one in Dundee—and the additional investment in health to support the opening of HMP Stirling.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

As Carol Mochan mentioned, the number of such deaths is at a 15-year high. Even with minimum unit pricing having been introduced seven years ago, it is clear that we still have an emergency and that individuals are slipping through the net. What do we need to do with regard to treatment and rehabilitation for individuals? The report found that individuals said that they would accept support in custody, but it does not seem to be being provided.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I will come on to speak in more detail about the action that the justice system is taking on that matter. Mr Stewart and others have made the point that there is no silver bullet. I am a great advocate for minimum unit pricing and would never detract from it, but there is never just one solution—there are always many solutions. That is particularly so for the work that my colleagues are taking in pursuing a public health approach to the issue.

Ms Minto and other health ministers are waiting on further work that is being done on what we can do, within our devolved competence, in relation to the advertisement of alcohol. There is no easy solution to that issue.

I convey to Mr Stewart and others that everyone, irrespective of their abode—whether that is in the community or at His Majesty’s pleasure—has the same right to access treatment. Our national health service does not and should not discriminate against people on the basis of their past life, what they have or have not done or, indeed, where they are housed—whether they are at liberty or in custody. I have understood that to my very core since I was a prison social worker quite a few decades ago.

On the action that is under way, I am proud that one of my last actions before I left drugs policy to become the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs was to update the prison-to-rehab pathway. Through that work, some important learning was undertaken on how we can prepare people who are leaving custody to go into rehabilitation. We also removed the 12-week limit on the rehabilitation period. Although the renewed focus on residential rehab came as a result of our drug deaths crisis, the investment in residential rehab actually benefits more people with an alcohol disorder. I was very pleased to do that work.

One of the cultural and operational changes is the presence of the recovery movement in our prisons. The Scottish Recovery Consortium’s work has grown. It started in 2021 with 10 residents in HMP Perth, where I used to work a number of years ago. That grew to HMPs Edinburgh, Addiewell, Glenochil, Polmont and Cornton Vale. Now, there is a recovery presence in all prisons, with the option of prisoners accessing mutual aid groups.

That speaks to the creation and building of relationships that serve people well in custody and prepare them for liberation. However, it is important that all that work aligns with the medication assisted treatment standards. Access to treatment, medicine and interventions is crucial, but so is broader holistic support, including financial, welfare and psychological support.

On consistency and the cross-Government angle, I chair a cross-Government ministerial oversight group on prisoner healthcare, which has been considering, for example, the Scottish Prison Service alcohol and drug strategy and the recruitment and retention of band 5 and 6 nurses in the prison system. The group has also been looking at a target operating model for prisoner healthcare. That might sound technical and not the most exciting aspect of policy, but we have to get into the nuts and bolts if we want to see standards, access and consistency. I also pay tribute to the national prison care network.

The arrest referral work is expanding. It is about contactable moments. Groups have been established across most local authority areas.

On alcohol and drug courts, I am very supportive of problem-solving courts, which are tailored to change and monitor individual behaviour. There is strong evidence that supports them. Ultimately, it is the decision of the judiciary and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service whether to create specialist divisions in the system. I will certainly discuss the matter further with the new chief executive of the service and the new Lord President.

The core of the SHAAP report was about a standard approach. Others spoke about the importance of the national treatment specification for alcohol and drug treatment in Scotland and the need for it to connect to MAT standards. We will use the national service specification to promote the good practice that exists in some areas of Scotland and ensure that that work is incorporated into standard practice.

My final point—it is, I promise, my final point, Presiding Officer—is about accountability. I speak about that often in the chamber, because we are accountable to ourselves and to one another as parliamentarians. Services are also accountable to themselves and other services. Accountability is not about blame. It is about answers, actions, people working together and proactively seeking to make a difference to prevent crises from becoming a catastrophe. It is about always seeking to take a preventative approach as well as responding when life goes terribly wrong. I am sure that everybody who has participated in the debate wants that different debate and different outcomes.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate. I suspend the meeting until 2.30 pm.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions on net zero, energy and transport. I advise members that there is a lot of interest in supplementaries, so I ask that we please have questions with limited preamble and answers that are as brief as possible.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to increase bus patronage in South Lanarkshire. (S6O-04306)

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

Our commitment to bus travel includes the investment of almost £465 million to support concessionary bus travel and to help to ensure that bus operators can continue to provide access to affordable transport through the network support grant in the deregulated market right across Scotland.

The concessionary travel scheme is instilling the habit of choosing the bus as a principal form of transport among young people, helping to sustain services while supporting our net zero ambitions. In December alone, 140,000 card holders from South Lanarkshire made more than 600,000 journeys under the national concessionary travel scheme.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I know that members will have welcomed the recent announcement from the Scottish Government that, as part of the budget, a £2 bus fare cap pilot will be introduced in one regional transport area. At the moment, more than 2.3 million people—everyone under the age of 22 or over 65, and disabled people and carers—benefit from free bus travel, and the £2 cap could build on that good work.

As the scheme is set to be introduced from January 2026, will the minister outline the criteria on how the pilot will be measured? I take this opportunity to encourage the minister to consider introducing the pilot across South Lanarkshire and Glasgow, to benefit my Rutherglen constituents.

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

I congratulate Clare Haughey on that straightforward pitch to the minister. She is absolutely right to highlight how many people are benefiting from free travel, thanks to the Government, and I very much welcome her interest in the £2 flat fare.

Although we are at the early stages of the fare cap pilot development, we are committed to delivering it on time and ensuring that travelling by bus is as attractive and affordable as possible. The work on the proposals will continue this year and will include continued dialogue with stakeholders, including local transport authorities and bus operators. As part of that process, we will determine suitable criteria for the pilot location.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The minister knows that I think that the £2 bus fare should be a national thing and that there is no need for a pilot. However, if we are to have one, clearly the best place for it is where most people live—the Strathclyde region. That is where it should be. What does the minister need to have happen? Does he need to have a formal bid from Strathclyde Partnership for Transport in order for Strathclyde to win that pilot?

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

I say well done to Graham Simpson for making his pitch for the pilot scheme. I am delighted that the scheme is getting so much coverage from members. However, I repeat that we are going through the process of working out what the pilot needs to do and what the criteria will be, and that we will announce that in due course.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

One aspect of increasing bus patronage is ensuring that buses and bus stations are places where people, including the staff, feel safe. Following the cross-party meeting and the Labour debate on antisocial behaviour on buses, how is the minister progressing work to improve safety on buses for passengers and drivers?

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

The member is absolutely right to bring up that on-going issue. We are continuing to consider it. We are still looking at the things that we need to do in order to progress some of the issues that we talked about in the past, and I will update the chamber and the member as we come to some conclusions.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Question 2 has been withdrawn.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

I apologise to members, as I may have to leave before the end of question time. I am grateful for permission to do so from your good self, Deputy Presiding Officer.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how much it estimates will be paid in compensation for the properties to be compulsorily purchased to further the progress of the dualling of the A96 between Inverness and Auldearn, including the Nairn bypass, and when that process will be completed. (S6O-04308)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Completion last year of the statutory process for the A96 dualling from Inverness to Nairn, including the Nairn bypass, clears the way for the Scottish ministers to take forward the final stage of the process to acquire the land that is required to construct the scheme, and Transport Scotland is pressing ahead with the procedural steps to make that happen.

It is currently expected that the process to take title to the land will be completed in the coming months. The current estimate of compensation for land to be acquired for the scheme is approximately £12 million.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

Scotland was promised in 2016 that the made orders for that project would be published in that year. They were published last year—eight years later. Even now, there is no timetable, no plan and no indication of when the Nairn bypass will be completed.

Will the cabinet secretary, at last, give a statement to Parliament setting out such a plan? If she will not, does she not think that an apology is due?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

First as the Minister for Transport and now, as Cabinet Secretary for Transport, I have progressed the A96 Inverness to Nairn project, including the Nairn bypass. I have ensured that we have made progress on completing the made orders and acquiring the land. We are acquiring the land because we intend to dual that part of the A96 first. That is what is happening.

As I explained to the public meeting in Nairn last summer, the timetable for dualling will be determined by two things. The first is the method of procurement, whether it is capital procurement or through a mutual investment model. We are considering the mutual investment model for the A96 part of the road—which we have just been discussing—and for the A9. On completion of that consideration, we will be in a position to determine the timetable, which I will be happy to share with the Parliament.

The other consideration is whether one procurement process will be completed for the whole project or whether the contracts will be separated for different parts. A strong argument was put to me at the public meeting in Nairn that the Nairn bypass might be done separately and differently. All those things will impact on the timetable, and we will consider them. When we have managed to assess all those points, I will come back to the Parliament.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the importance of the A737 to North Ayrshire. (S6O-04309)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We appreciate fully the importance of the A737 to North Ayrshire and, indeed, to Scotland. That is why the Government has invested approximately £14 million in the construction of the Dalry bypass and the Den realignment project.

Through the second strategic transport projects review, we have assessed the future needs of the Ayrshire and Arran region. That has resulted in a number of recommendations, including to focus on maintaining the trunk roads in the area—including the A737—so that they remain safe, resilient and adapted to deal with the impacts of climate change.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Despite having levels of traffic comparable to those on the busiest sections of the A9 and despite serving some of Scotland’s most deprived communities, the mostly single-carriageway A737 will receive a fraction of the investment made in dualling the A9, which is forecast to total £3.7 billion.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that enhanced safety and improved connectivity boosts economic growth? Will she commit to ensuring that the new Head Street and Barmill Road junctions in Beith, which are essential for public safety—and have been promised for many years—are progressed to completion?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government is committed to taking forward the design of the traffic signalisation of the A737 Head Street and Wardrop Street junctions. The member is correct to identify the impact on the economy of good transport connections.

As part of the detailed design for the scheme, further geotechnical investigation is required to accommodate the upgraded traffic signal junction on the A737 at Head Street and Wardrop Street. That investigation is programmed to commence later in 2025 and will inform the design and construction of the signalised junction. Construction is currently programmed for the 2026-27 financial year, subject to available funding and completion of the design.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding Ineos proceeding with the closure of Scotland’s only refinery at Grangemouth, in light of the UK Government’s reported £600 million loan to the company for a project in Belgium. (S6O-04310)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I continue to engage very regularly about the closure of the refinery. I met UK Government ministers on that aspect last week. I am disappointed that that loan has been made to Ineos, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer offered nothing in her speech that would avoid an abrupt and unnecessary closure of the refinery or that would support Grangemouth’s transition to play its part in Scotland’s green economy in the future.

We need the Labour Government to start doing what it said before the election that it would do and to bring forward real investment to save Grangemouth and the jobs, businesses and livelihoods that depend on it.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

This is a sorry situation. Hundreds of highly skilled jobs will be lost, probably for ever, and there will be no refinery capability in Scotland, which is a top 25 oil-producing nation. The results will be worse for the environment, because imports have a higher environmental cost.

Minister, this has been coming for months. We have warned and warned about the situation. The Scottish Government might be happy to sit round pontificating about a just transition, but, to everyone outside the Parliament, it looks passive and pointless. Will the latest UK Government betrayal finally push the Scottish Government to urgently use its devolved powers creatively?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I assure Ash Regan that I am not sitting round passively. Since my tenure as Minister for Energy, I have done nothing but engage on this issue with the previous UK Government, with Petroineos and with the current UK Government. I have engaged in good faith with the UK Government on our joint efforts to fund work on the future of the site. I am doing what I can with our enterprise agencies, my officials and partners in the Cabinet to encourage investment in the site.

I am particularly distressed that the UK chancellor announced last week that money for sustainable aviation fuel is going to places that are not Grangemouth, when both the UK Government and the Scottish Government have invested in a study that has shown that the Grangemouth refinery is ripe to be transformed into a sustainable aviation fuel hub.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

There are a number of supplementary questions. I hope to take them all.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Both the UK and Scottish Governments have failed to make any decisive intervention to support Grangemouth. People in Central Scotland will not be impressed with the blame game that we hear in the chamber today. They want real answers and they want action.

I will ask the minister some very simple questions to which she will surely know the answers. Who is writing the project willow report? When is it due? She must know when it is due. Will Petroineos see the report before the UK and Scottish Governments see it?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I have answers to all those questions. The project willow report is being written by Ernst & Young, which has been brought in as consultant on the issue. The report is backed by both Governments and will be available by the end of this month, more or less. We will ensure that both Governments and Petroineos get sight of the full report—more than that, we are teeing up potential investors to see the report.

I have been working very hard on the issue with my colleagues in Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Development International. We have had considerable interest in what project willow will bring up. Although I would like the refinery to continue, with Petroineos and its shareholders making a different decision about its closure, I am feeling hopeful that, through project willow, we can get investors involved in the future of the site.

Those are the answers to the questions that Stephen Kerr has put to me. I am happy to give him any more details that I can.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests with regard to trade unions.

Many people are angry about the Petroineos decision, the way that the company has gone about it and the fact that redundancy notices have been issued this week. They are also angry about governmental failure—the failure of both Governments. Does the cabinet secretary understand that anger? Does she accept that this is not over, that this is not the last word and that the fight to save these jobs carries on?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I accept that the fight is not over. The First Minister has written to the Prime Minister and, this morning, to Sir Jim Ratcliffe about the issue. I continue to work with partners in the UK Government to ask Petroineos to make a different decision. We have had almost weekly meetings with them on progress, and we are making sure that Petroineos is doing the right thing by its workers. Where it is not doing the right thing, I want those workers to know that I have an open ear to any of their concerns, so that I can put them directly to Petroineos.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

It is very clear that the UK Government has abandoned the workers at Grangemouth. The workers are rightly angry that both Governments have left them to the will of a billionaire who would rather play fantasy football than look after his workers. The decision has the potential to devastate the town that I grew up in, and I am angry on behalf of all of those workers. With the greatest of respect to the cabinet secretary, I note that anything that might be generated by project willow, and by others, is potentially too far down the road to solve the immediate and urgent issue facing us.

I have not yet lost hope that the Scottish Government will meaningfully step in, save the jobs and ensure a sustainable future for the site. Will the cabinet secretary now step in to address this increasingly urgent situation?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Members, we listened to all the other questioners with courtesy. We should do the same for Ms Mackay.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The Government has already stepped in to get reassurances about the redundancy payments for the workers and the level of compulsory redundancies. I have in front of me details of a substantial number of voluntary redundancies having been asked for. The member will forgive me if I do not give the detail of that in the chamber, because I need to check whether it can go into the public domain. People have also been redeployed across the site.

It is still our position that we would like refining to continue, to allow project willow to bear fruit and attract investment. The refinery could be a going concern for anyone out there who wanted to invest in it. If the UK Government were to give the refinery track status for carbon capture and storage, it would make it eminently more investable and might even change the mind of the current owners.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to the potential impact on travel times in Mid Scotland and Fife of the proposed speed limit changes contained in the national speed management review consultation. (S6O-04311)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

As part of the Scottish Government’s record £36 million investment in road safety, a national speed management review is under way. The review aims to ensure that speed limits across Scotland are effective and help to reduce the number of people killed and injured on our roads, including in Mid Scotland and Fife. Proposed changes contained in the review have been rigorously assessed and are expected to reduce casualties and fatalities.

International evidence, including France’s successful 2018 speed limit changes, shows how measures can lower speeds and reduce casualties. The assessment indicates that the changes will have a minimal impact on journey times, because reduced speeds contribute to smoother traffic flow, which reduces congestion, serious collisions and diversions, and improves journey reliability. A public consultation is under way and I encourage the member to share her views before it closes on 5 March.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will do so.

The proposed arbitrary reduction in speed limits on 60mph roads will add to journey times and, undoubtedly, to the frustration that motorists are feeling. Many businesses across the region depend on the movement of goods and materials, and single carriageway roads are the backbone of the transport infrastructure in the area. Workers who live in rural areas often have no viable alternative to using their cars, and reducing speed limits on single carriageways could significantly increase commute times, thereby creating more challenges for employees and businesses alike. The disproportionate impact that the proposals will have on my constituents and on businesses should not be taken lightly. Will the cabinet secretary carefully consider the consequences for my region and scrap the proposals as soon as possible?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We will listen to the consultation, which closes on 5 March. I remind Roz McCall that, in 2023, 754 people were killed or seriously injured on single-carriageway roads. In France, the Government implemented a national speed limit reduction in July 2018, which led to a reduction in the average speed of vehicles, a 10 per cent decrease in fatalities and a minimal impact on journey times, of less than one minute in a 50km journey.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the petition, reportedly signed by hundreds of Keith residents and businesses, regarding the disruption caused on the A96 by the on-going works at Union bridge, including the calls for businesses to be compensated for any significant losses during these works. (S6O-04312)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We recognise the on-going impact that those vital and complex repair works are having on the local community and businesses in Keith, following a landslip that resulted in the failure of the wing wall at Union bridge. The operating company that conducts the repairs and road management discussed that with representatives of local elected members, Keith community council and the local traders association in September, and it plans to meet them again shortly to provide an update, once the repair contract is awarded in the coming weeks.

The temporary traffic lights and safety barrier were installed to prevent any further risks to pedestrians and road users, with “business as usual” signage added to continue to direct traffic into Keith and its businesses.

Douglas Ross will be aware that compensation is not payable to any businesses for disruption arising from road works on any trunk road and the motorway network that are required to keep them in a safe condition. Unfortunately, such work can sometimes result in disruption to local communities, but every effort is being made to mitigate impacts.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I do not think that residents and businesses in Keith feel that every effort is being made to mitigate the impacts, because the work has been on-going since last summer.

The cabinet secretary did not mention the petition. What is her response to the hundreds of business owners who have written to her, who have still not received a reply? I handed the petition over to the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity in December last year. We are now in February, and we do not know what Fiona Hyslop and the Scottish Government think. Will she look at alternative measures to compensate the businesses in question, if it is not possible to provide compensation for work on a trunk road? Those businesses are losing hundreds of thousands of pounds as a result of the works, and they deserve to be compensated.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have set out the policy on compensation—or, rather, the fact that no compensation is payable in relation to work on trunk roads. I recognised the on-going nature of the problems: it is a complex issue to resolve. The contracting started before Christmas, but it has been delayed as a result of emergency work by utilities companies in proximity to the slope failure. That emergency work required a further review of the proposed design solution that is to be undertaken, so that any additional implications could be considered. The most up-to-date position can be provided to those who have petitioned the Government, although I do not think that we have the contact details for everyone who signed the petition.

On journey times, I understand from our operators that the maximum delay is 12 minutes. I know that a delay of 12 minutes can cause an issue. If Douglas Ross is able to provide information that shows that people are regularly waiting longer than 12 minutes, I invite him to do so, but the information that I have been provided with is that the delay is less than 12 minutes.

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

As a frequent traveller on the A96, I understand that it was a slope failure as a result of heavy rain that caused the damage to the bridge. What challenges exist in relation to the required remedial work? Given the complexities, is it not crucial that the work be carried out with the utmost care, which will, regrettably, inevitably lead to the work taking longer?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Be as brief as possible, cabinet secretary.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The work is a complex operation that needs to be done safely. The bridge wing wall failed due to a damaged drainage pipe that saturated the soil behind it. It is in an urban location and is next to a watercourse. The levels in the River Isla and the groundwater levels all have to be considered to ensure that the work is done properly and safely for all concerned.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

To ask the Scottish Government what lessons have been learned following the travel disruption and other impacts as a result of storm Éowyn. (S6O-04313)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Storm Éowyn caused major disruption. The immediate lesson learned is that the early issuing of the red weather warning for wind by the Met Office on Thursday 23 January, combined with the convening of the multi-agency response team, empowered Police Scotland to promptly issue early advice to road users to avoid any form of travel during the period of the red weather warning, which enabled the public, businesses, councils and schools to communicate clearly.

The sharing of proactive messaging at local, regional and national levels helped to bring about a huge reduction in traffic levels, of 80 to 90 per cent, across key trunk roads during the red warning.

The messaging also enabled specialist teams across the transport and energy sectors to be mobilised in advance of the storm. Intense co-operation between Network Rail and ScotRail supported recovery from unprecedented damage. I thank everyone for limiting their travel during the storm.

There will also be a more formal lessons-learned exercise, which will be closely considered by the Cabinet.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

The cabinet secretary will be well aware that the south of Scotland—Dumfries and Galloway, in particular—was affected more than many communities, with the A75 being closed for some time.

Another lesson that can be learned is in relation to people in Dumfries and Galloway whose power was off for almost a week. One of the main issues was a failure to connect generators. Scottish Power was very reactive and responsive in ensuring that people on the priority list had generators, but some had to wait three or four days for electricians to connect the generators.

Will the cabinet secretary, given her remit, work with her colleagues to look at a potential scheme, whereby sockets could be provided in warm hubs and vulnerable people’s homes to allow generators to be connected as a matter of urgency, instead of the process taking three or four days?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I will discuss that suggestion with my Cabinet colleagues. We can always learn lessons—those that have been learned from storm Arwen helped to improve the response this time round. Lessons are learned from every storm, so I will take Finlay Carson’s suggestion to the relevant minister and ask them to respond on how that might be taken forward, if the energy companies think that it would be helpful.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

There are a couple of supplementary questions and I will try to get them both in, but they will have to be brief, as will the responses.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

Flood prevention schemes announced in 2015 have not been finished. Extreme weather is hitting people’s homes and our transport infrastructure increasingly hard, so what is the Scottish Government doing to accelerate investment now?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Regarding transport, which is my direct responsibility, the Scottish Government has produced a climate adaptation plan to try to tackle a number of the issues affecting the transport network. Flood defence schemes are the responsibility of one of my ministerial colleagues. I understand that extensive funding for that is available in this year’s budget. I do not know whether Sarah Boyack has decided to support that budget, but flood funding is part of the budget offer.

We know increasingly that adaptation, mitigation, flood prevention in general and tackling the implications of climate change for our road and rail networks all need action and investment. I am working with cabinet secretary Gillian Martin and others to ensure that investment can be brought forward to realise that. I hope that the member will support the budget and support flood prevention.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

One of the United Kingdom’s largest food distributors, Bidfood, chose to ignore the warning of danger to life during storm Éowyn and told its workers that it would be a normal working day. Does the cabinet secretary agree that that was completely unacceptable, and will she review the legislative obligations to ensure that companies such as Bidfood ensure their workers’ safety in red weather warning situations, and are held to account if they do not do so?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have seen those reports and think that that action was unacceptable. Workers and others were put in jeopardy, and overturned heavy goods vehicles prevented energy companies from getting to the very people whom we heard about in the previous question.

On the issue of workers being expected to travel in such conditions, some essential workers will, unfortunately, be required to support the emergency response. Paul Sweeney will know that the issue is part of employment legislation. I know that his party does not want this Parliament to have responsibility for employment legislation, but his request could be usefully pursued with the UK Government.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes portfolio questions. There will be a brief pause to allow those on the front benches to change places, before we move to the next item of business.

Post-school Education and Skills Funding Body Landscape

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Graeme Dey on simplifying the post-school education and skills funding body landscape in Scotland. The minister will take questions after his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

A fortnight ago, we announced progress on our plans to reform the post-school education and skills system. We announced that the Scottish Funding Council would assume responsibility for all apprenticeships, and that the Student Awards Agency Scotland would take on responsibility for further education student support. Therefore, one body, the SFC, will be responsible for funding provision for teaching, training and related activities, while another body, SAAS, will be responsible for student support. That decision was informed by what stakeholders told us through our public consultation.

Our approach is designed to put the learner at the centre. It aims to ensure that our whole education and skills system works as a single system that is easy to navigate and in which everyone takes responsibility to deliver excellence for all.

Reform is, of course, about more than the individual parts of the system; it is about the whole system working together. Yesterday, the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) Bill was introduced in the Scottish Parliament. First and foremost, the bill will consolidate the SFC’s responsibilities for securing the provision of national training programmes, apprenticeships and work-based learning. The bill will establish, for the first time, a statutory framework for apprenticeships in Scotland, recognising the value that we place on apprenticeships and on the delivery of the First Minister’s mission to drive economic growth. It will also give ministers the power to commission the SFC to deliver new national training programmes and will mean that we can address training needs that might not otherwise be met, making it easier to ensure that programmes are aligned to the Government’s four priorities.

Furthermore, the bill will improve the SFC’s governance and how it oversees tertiary education, including by creating a greater focus on the needs and interests of learners. It will also knit together the SFC’s existing responsibilities and its new responsibilities for apprenticeships and work-based learning in a coherent way, which we hope employers will welcome.

Today is a significant milestone for tertiary education and training. The bill will enable us to move from three funding bodies to two. In our programme for government, we said that we would

“Reform the education and skills funding system so it is easier to navigate and responsive to learners and skills priorities—breaking down silos and reducing bureaucracy”.

The bill moves us closer to that.

The other half of funding body simplification is the movement of further education student support from the SFC to SAAS. That change does not require legislation, which means that we can progress at pace, and we are doing so. I make it clear that there will be no immediate change to funding arrangements for college or university students, but bringing student support responsibilities together will unlock opportunities. The change will enable new ways of administering student support, collecting data and providing coherent information and guidance to learners and institutions.

Before I go on, I thank our three public bodies—the SFC, SAAS and Skills Development Scotland—and their staff for their help in getting us to this point. I am also grateful for the input from colleges, universities, employers, training providers and others whose insights have absolutely informed our decisions.

I know that change can be unsettling. If the bill is passed, the SFC will need to evolve to encompass its expanded remit. Responsibilities for apprenticeships and national training programmes will move from SDS to the SFC. The work that SDS has done on apprenticeships has given us firm foundations on which to build, and the skills and experience of SDS staff will be invaluable in establishing the new arrangements and shaping an improved offering. A refocused SDS will continue to play a vital role in skills planning, careers advice and support for employers.

It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge the influence on our reforms of James Withers and his review, and I thank him once again for his important work.

I want to be clear about why we are doing this. First and foremost, we want to deliver the best service that we can for learners and employers. Secondly, we want to make things simpler for colleges, universities, training providers and employers. Last but not least, we have to get maximum value from every pound that we invest.

The bill makes provision for Scottish apprenticeships and work-based learning, laying the foundations for apprenticeship reform. We can take the best of what works now and change what does not. The bill will enable improvement but leave room to develop future apprenticeship policy with stakeholders.

Employer engagement is critical to all of this work, so we are building a dedicated employer network to guide it. We will sharpen the focus of the apprenticeship approvals group and the standards and frameworks group to ensure that they play a vital role in the transition process, and we will broaden employer participation at every stage across the reform landscape. The bill also includes provision for a new apprenticeship committee of the SFC and provision for apprenticeship certificates to help apprentices to demonstrate that they have gained the relevant training, experience and qualifications.

That leads me on to qualifications reform. We must have up-to-date, accessible qualifications that are fit for learners at all stages of their lives. Work is under way to fully understand the qualifications landscape in tertiary education. The qualifications must be valued by employers and learners, they must clearly signal the skills and knowledge that individuals have acquired and, crucially, they must be flexible enough to adapt to the ever-changing demands of the modern economy.

Tertiary education and training must deliver the skills that employers need and, importantly, meet our skills requirements in 21st century Scotland so that we can address net zero, support our national health service and grow a thriving Scottish economy. I have engaged extensively with ministerial colleagues across the Government and with our key stakeholders to develop our approach to skills planning, which is rooted in evidence of what works and what is needed. Tertiary education and training must be responsive to both regional and national skills needs.

A few weeks ago, I met the regional economic partnership network again, and we had a good discussion about skills planning across regions. We still have work to do, but I am pleased with the progress that we are making and the co-design approach that we are taking.

High-quality careers advice is essential to getting the right people into the right jobs, tackling poverty and growing the economy. It is vital to have that advice in schools in order to help young people to realise their potential.

We will shortly be announcing new arrangements for the career services collaborative. The outgoing interim chair Grahame Smith, the secretariat and all members of the collaborative have achieved much since its formation. Their work forms a great base for progressing to the next phase, which is, importantly, focusing on improving careers advice and support.

I have spent a good deal of time meeting stakeholders, especially employers and training providers that are engaged in apprenticeship delivery, and listening to their views as we developed our thinking. I have also engaged with a number of MSP colleagues along the way, and I am grateful for that engagement. With the bill beginning its formal processes today, I am committing to ramping up that engagement over the coming months to ensure that, if the Parliament supports the bill, we will be ready to implement the outcomes in a way that best serves the interests of our future apprentices and employers and the needs of Scotland’s economy.

Lastly, I want to work with members from all parties in the Scottish Parliament to lay the foundations for lasting reform of the kind that I think that we generally recognise is needed.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The minister will now take questions on the issues that were raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move to the next item of business. As ever, I would be grateful if members who wish to ask a question pressed their request-to-speak buttons if they have not already done so.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement and for his engagement with members on the bill to date. There are some welcome reforms in the bill, which the Scottish Conservatives agree with, but we also want to see the Scottish Government move further. Yesterday, the Education, Children and Young People Committee heard from college leaders on the impact that the loss of both the skills boost fund and the flexible workforce development fund has had on upskilling and supporting key employers as well as on skill shortages, especially around social care. I hope that there is an opportunity to correct that with what the minister has announced. It is clear that we also need to see more business involvement in regional skills development work. The Scottish Conservatives would like to see additional reforms to make more private sector funding available to the college sector in the delivery of key sector courses.

I have two questions for the minister. First, how does he envisage the employer network helping businesses to influence, secure and embed funded courses of the type that many employers are telling us are not currently being provided to upskill the workforce? Secondly, as employers in England can access support from the apprenticeship levy not only for training but for apprenticeship pay, is that a reform that ministers will look to introduce to help significantly increase the number of apprenticeships that small and medium-sized enterprises can deliver in communities across our country?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

There is a lot to unpack there. Securing non-public money for colleges is an area that we are actively engaging with the college sector on, because there is a great opportunity there. Some colleges do very well in that space and others do much less so. There is an appetite from both national and local businesses for that sort of access.

With regard to the influence that colleges can bring, we have to be careful. It is about ensuring that the employer voice is heard so that colleges and other training providers can understand what employers require colleges and other institutions to produce. That already happens in some localities but not so much in others, so we are trying to bring in a bit of standardisation on that.

I do not necessarily agree with the approach to the use of the apprenticeship levy that Miles Briggs has articulated, but, on his point about SMEs, there is undoubtedly more to be done. We repeatedly hear that one of the issues that puts SMEs off taking on an apprentice is the bureaucracy around it. We have been exploring whether there is an opportunity to do something on that to take some of the load off SMEs, because they are the bedrock of the Scottish economy.

I look forward to continuing to engage with Miles Briggs on those matters.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Although I note the minister’s attempt to strike a collegiate tone, I will repeat what I said to him in private: my fear is that the Government is moving too slowly and putting structural change ahead of functional reform. It has been many months since he has met any members of the Labour front bench, and his statement falls short of what we understood the Government’s direction to be, and it begs some serious questions. Although it was imperfect, the previous system with the Scottish Apprenticeship Advisory Board and SDS had a very clear role for employers and trade unions in the governance structures. The proposals for an employers network have no such formal governance structure, so how can industry have confidence that it will be at the forefront in shaping the future skills landscape when it appears that its role is being diluted?

Furthermore, it appears that the Scottish Government has taken inspiration from the Monty Python dead parrot sketch on its approach to SDS. It appears to be an ex-agency that no longer has a function. I am surprised that the minister did not describe it as being the Norwegian blue of agencies. A bit like Michael Palin’s pet shop owner, the minister is claiming that it still has a function—but what is its function if it is no longer even providing careers advice, which we understood would be its primary function?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I will start with the end of Mr Johnson’s question. My speech made very clear what SDS will continue to do, including providing careers advice. Far from diminishing SDS’s role in that space, I talked about an expanded role for the careers collaborative and SDS’s continuing role in employer engagement and in skills. On the point about diluting the employers’ voice, I have been very clear in the Parliament and with employers that we are expanding that role, which is why I think employers will take confidence from what we are doing. We are trying to weave the employers’ voice into absolutely everything that we do, because that is vital.

I met SAAB a few months ago. In our most recent conversation, when we talked about the future role for employers, it said that it was not precious about a structure or forum, but it wanted to be assured that the employers’ voice would continue to be heard—we intend to continue to ensure that. If the member was listening to the start of my speech, he will know that I made the point that SAAB has two committees that will continue through the process—certainly through the transition and perhaps beyond that. I anticipate that its members will be heavily involved in the work that will be taken forward.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

The outline business case for reform talks about building on the best of what we have. Can the minister speak to the strong foundations of Scotland’s post-school education and skills system and about how simplifying the funding body landscape can unlock further potential in the sector?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

We are trying to create a more transparent and agile system. There is no doubt that the system as it is currently configured, as well as being quite complex and confusing, does not make best use of public money—I do not think that anyone believes that it does. The bill provides an opportunity to take forward a series of reforms. I am not going to stand here and pretend that it is the endgame—it is far from that. Essentially, it will be an enabling power that will allow us to make the changes in conjunction with employers and other stakeholders to get it right for the future. That is what we intend to do.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Scotland’s apprenticeship system is essential for skills development, which needs sustained investment. With on-going labour market challenges, it is crucial that funding structures are better aligned to support apprenticeships and the economy. Given the recommendations in the Withers review, which highlights the need for better co-ordination between the Scottish Government, the Scottish Funding Council and Skills Development Scotland, can the minister confirm that the transfer of funding responsibilities from SDS to the SFC will ensure that apprenticeships will finally be properly funded and will be aligned with Scotland’s needs? How many additional apprenticeship places does the minister think the proposed changes will create?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The member makes a good point about the nature of the landscape. There is no doubt that, as it is currently configured, we do not get the best value or the best return, partly because the system is fragmented and two different bodies are funding the same provision, in some respects. As I said before, we believe that making the changes that we have alluded to will give us the opportunity to get a hold of this and to shape the offering in a way that will be more transparent and more responsive to the needs of the economy.

Everyone says to me, “We would like more apprentices and more money for them.” That is the nature of it. No one ever says, “Minister, we’ve got enough money.” I am not going to stand here and say that we have forecast that we will be able to create X more apprentices as a result of the changes. Assuming that the Parliament agrees to the reforms, we need to use them to develop the offering in parallel, so that we will have an offering that is much better aligned to what employers are looking for and what our young people deserve. At the heart of this, we need an approach that shows that we want to give our young people long-term, sustainable and well-paid employment. If we take that alongside the point about the economy, we will make progress.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

I am interested in what the minister said in his statement and in what he said in response to the last question. How will consolidating funding streams for post-school education and skills development contribute to the Scottish Government’s mission to grow the economy?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The issue, if one understands the landscape, is that, at the moment, the funding mechanism for apprenticeships sees very obvious funding provided by SDS through the SFC but additional funding provided in some instances through the SFC by way of college credits. It is not a transparent system. We need more transparency and agility so that we have the opportunity to better align what we are offering and providing with the needs of the economy. If we pull that together, we will get to the place that we are looking to get to.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Yesterday, Colleges Scotland told the Education, Children and Young People Committee that

“Colleges are vital anchor institutions that are dedicated to delivering skills training and providing education at all stages of life and in our communities.”

I think that that is vital to our future. It also said:

“To keep doing that, colleges need their Government to deliver reform to deliver the agile and flexible system that their learners need and that employers want, to improve collaborations with both schools and industry.”

The bill proposes structural reform, but what will the minister do to deliver the real reform that colleges need?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I think that I am right in saying that Colleges Scotland welcomes the reforms because it sees the opportunity that arises from them to produce a system that may well benefit the colleges in some instances but, more than anything, because the reforms will benefit learners.

I have to be clear that we will have a continuing mixed apprenticeship offer that will involve the private training providers. Colleges Scotland welcomes what we propose, and I am committed to working with it and with others to sharpen up the model. There is an opportunity for colleges to step forward, because, although they do not currently occupy the apprenticeship landscape, they can provide the holistic wraparound support that our apprentices are entitled to expect from the system.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I welcome the minister’s statement. He is aware of skills shortages in many traditional areas, such as engineering and construction—shortages that impact on economic growth. How will the reset help to deliver the key skills that Scotland requires, and will the Government redouble its efforts to encourage more women and girls to study and seek apprenticeships and employment in those vital sectors?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Work is under way across the Government with key stakeholders to develop our approach to skills planning. For example, we are in the process of developing an advanced manufacturing skills action plan, and we will engage with the sector to assess options and agree a package of interventions aimed at increasing skills supply. We are progressing with the apprenticeship reform that we have heard about today.

As part of that work, we will look to see whether we can break down any barriers—perceived or actual—to the participation of women and girls in occupations where they are underrepresented. The changes also provide the opportunity to ensure that education and training, including apprenticeships, are readily accessible to young people with disabilities.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

Over the past decade, a number of colleges and universities have reneged on the fair work agreements that they have come to with their campus trade unions. When asked about that last year, the then chief executive of the Scottish Funding Council explained that it lacked the powers to intervene effectively in such situations, but that she had proposed such powers to the Scottish Government ahead of the bill. Have those proposals been reflected in the bill? Will the SFC have the power to intervene where a college or university management breaches a fair work agreement?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The bill contains a power that strengthens the ability of the SFC to require universities and colleges to do certain things, particularly in relation to the provision of information, and it specifically requires secondary legislation to allow ministers to list what those areas could be. At the moment, it is sufficiently open for those things to be explored, and I am happy to discuss that with Ross Greer, because it is imperative that fair work is at the heart of what all our institutions are delivering.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I support the bill. The single source of funding and the careers reforms are welcome, but there is clearly a nervousness, including from the chambers of commerce, about the employer voice. There is clearly nervousness about moving the funding from an employer-based body—SDS—to an education-based body—the Funding Council. In particular, as we heard yesterday in the Education, Children and Young People Committee, there is concern that the funding model for further education is not necessarily flexible enough to meet the needs of employers. I invite the minister to have a meeting with me and the chambers of commerce to see whether we can find a solution to that nervousness.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I met representatives from the chambers of commerce some time ago, but I am happy to take Willie Rennie up on his invitation.

I reassure members that the bill requires ministers to have regard to the desirability of including in the membership of the SFC persons who

“have experience of, and have shown capacity in, the provision of ... apprenticeships or work-based learning”.

That is one of the changes that the bill allows us to make. I am keen to take the opportunity that this year affords us, with changes in the membership of the SFC, to ensure that that experience is on the board. That is essential.

I have already highlighted the work that will be done around the committee experience, but I am disappointed if the chambers of commerce have paid attention to what has been going on over the past year and are still nervous. We have engaged extensively with employers and gained a lot of positive feedback from them. If there is that nervousness, I am happy to do something to address it.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Now is the time to significantly ramp up investment in green skills, and reforming the post-school learning system is key to that investment in Scotland’s economic future. I therefore welcome the Scottish Government’s recent announcement on funding for colleges to support the offshore wind skills pipeline. Can the minister comment on how simplifying the skills funding body landscape will further help colleges and universities to deliver the green skills agenda?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The post-school education and skills system is already supporting the transition to net zero, but we can and must go further. The system must be able to respond at greater pace and with greater impact to meet the challenges and opportunities that the transition to net zero is placing on it. That is one reason why reform is a must and the changes are important.

Our proposals will help to make the system more responsive to the Government’s four priorities, including tackling the climate emergency. Taken together with the work on skills planning, the changes can help to deliver more green skills. For example, the bill will establish for the first time a statutory framework for apprenticeships in Scotland. That is anticipated to facilitate different and more transparent ways of funding apprenticeships. It could be used, for example, to shift the emphasis on to more or different apprenticeships that have a focus on achieving net zero.

Kevin Stewart rightly referenced colleges and universities, but I reiterate that we will have a mixed apprenticeship offering, in which private training providers will have a role.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Earlier this week, I visited West College Scotland in West Dunbartonshire in my region. I witnessed the excellent work that it does in training apprentices in various fields, such as engineering, nursing, construction and building. As the minister knows, apprenticeships play an important role in Scotland's economy. However, college officials expressed concern about uncertainty when it comes to funding.

The minister has just said that there will be no immediate change to funding arrangements of college or university students. Therefore, can he guarantee that further education institutions will get the funding that they deserve?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

We all know where this is going, but it is a bit rich for a Conservative member to rock up here today and talk about more money for colleges and universities when her party wants money for tax cuts. As I keep saying, we cannot square that circle. If Ms Gosal wants to go to a college and sympathise with officials about more funding, I hope that she would be good enough to be honest with them and say, “By the way, if we had got our way, there would be even less money available.”

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

As we have heard, there will be a shift from three post-school education and skills funding bodies down to two. Some might ask why the Scottish Government did not take the opportunity to reduce that to a single funding body. I would like to hear the benefits of consolidation and having those two funding bodies.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The option was chosen because it simplifies the tertiary education system by providing clear and separate remits for our public bodies. It means that the SFC has responsibility for funding all teaching and learning provision, and SAAS has responsibility for all student support funding. It is less disruptive than moving to a single funding body, but it still takes us in the direction of what James Withers rightly called for.

The decision to proceed with the two-body approach was also based on consultation with stakeholders and the findings of the outline business case.

I will make a point that goes to some of the comments that we have heard today: changing structures alone will not deliver the reform that we all know needs to happen here. This is an enabling process that will allow us to make the changes that we require to make.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The minister generously did not take up his full allocation of 10 minutes, so I can take the two colleagues who still want to ask a question.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. I refer the minister to his comments about careers advice. In his statement, he talked of a “refocused SDS” having a “vital role” in careers advice. In response to one of the questions, he said that SDS will “play a part”. However, in another part of the statement that dealt with the career services collaborative, he talked about announcing shortly new arrangements for that.

The CSC exists in part as a mechanism for the Scottish Government and other policy makers to consult and engage with careers services. Going forward, who will have responsibility for giving expert, tailored careers advice to our young people at school?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The role of SDS, as the national career service, will continue. Its role in the career services collaborative will change. The career services collaborative, with co-chairs, will report to ministers and deliver to a vision that ministers will set. It is quite a simple and straightforward vision.

I am looking for the component parts of the career services collaborative to all take responsibility for the delivery of careers advice. SDS delivers in schools—that is its responsibility, although it has a degree of wider responsibility—but we need to see careers advice delivered through the developing the young workforce programme, and in our colleges and universities. The challenge that will be set for all the participating members is to take forward that responsibility, delivering to a clear and agreed message.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The minister is a good chap, but he has to accept that he has dismembered SDS and yet, somehow, it lives on. Perhaps he can elucidate on how the changes will ensure that apprenticeships and college places are held in equal esteem with university degrees, because that is a critical issue. Will he also reflect on my previous suggestion to rename graduate apprenticeships as degree apprenticeships?